{ 



V 






DANIELS & SMITH'S 

Cheap Book Store, 
Cor. Fourth & Arch sts. 

PniLADELPHIA. 






PI 



LIBMRY OF CONGRESS. # 







UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, t 



J 






y 



PRIMITIVE 

TRUTH AND ORDER 

VINDICATED FRO^I 

MODERN MISREPRESENTATION: 

WITH 

A DEFENCE OF EPISCOPACY, 

PARTICULARLY THAT OF 

SCOTLAND, 

AGAINST AN ATTACK MADE ON IT 

BY THE LATE DR. QAMPBELU OF ABERDEEN, 

IN HIS. 

LECTURES ON ECCLflSIASTICAL mSTORY. 



^ , BY THE RIGHT REV. JOHN SKINNER, 

TiLN ABERDEEN", SENIOR BISHOP OF TH^ SCOTCH EPISCOPAI. CHURCH, 

I 

Zf^X THE FIRST AMERICAN EDITION^y?^ 

To which is annexed, U 

A REVIEW OF DR. HAWEIS' CHURCH m^ORY. ::^ 





PRINTED AND SOLD BY T. (3 J. SWOPP'. 
No, 160 Pearl-Street. 



1808. 






Tbu Library 
OF CowoRes^ 



ADVERTISEMENT 
TO THIS EDITION. 

The original edition of this work contained 
a short " Address to the Episcopalians of Scot- 
land." As this address derives its principal 
interest from the local circumstances of the 
Church in that country, the publishers have 
omitted it; and they have subjoined a very 
able Review of Dr. Haweis' Church Hhtoryy 
extracted from the Anti- Jacobin Magazine, 
which, they think, will enhance the value of 
the volume. 



THE FOLLOWING WORK, IN VINDICATION 

OP 

PRIMITIVE TRUTH AND ORDER, 

IS MOST RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED 
TO THE HONOURABLE 

SIR WILLIAM FORBES, BARONET, 

OF PITSLIGOj 

BOTH AS A GRATEFUL ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

OF HIS EXERTIONS IN THE SAME CAUSE, 

And 

AS A HUMBLE TESTIMONY 

OF THAT SINCERE REGARD FOR HIS PUBLIC VIRTUES, 

AND NO LESS AMIABLE CHARACTER 

IN PRIVATE LIFE, 

WHICH HAS BEEN LONG AND DEEPLY IMPRESSED 

ON THE MIND OF 

HIS MUCH OBLIGED, OBEDIENT, 

AND VERY FAITHFUL SERVANT, 

THE AUTHOR. 



CONTENTS. 



Introduction^ Page 9—25 

Chapter L 

The Christian Religion^ beings like its Divine Author^ 
" the same yesterday^ to-day, and for ever^"* ought 
to be received and embraced^ just as it is represented 
and held out in the Scriptures of Truth^ " without 
adding thereto^ or diminishing from it^^ 27— -88 

Chapter II. 

The Church of Christy in which his Religion is received 
and embraced^ is that spiritual Society, in which the 
Ministration of holy Things is committed to the three 
distinct Orders of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, 
deriving their Authority from the Apostles, as those 
Apostles received their Commission from Christ, 89— 2o8 

Chapter III. 

A Part of this Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, 
though deprived of the Support of Civil Establish' 
ment, does still exist in this Country, under the Name 
of the Scotch Episcopal Church, whose Doctrine, 
Discipline, and Worship, as happily agreeing with 
that of the first and purest Ages of Christianity, 
ought to be steadily adhered to, by all who profess to 
be of the Episcopal Communion in this Part of the 
Kingdom, 259 — 340 

Appendix, containing List and Letters of Consecra- 
tions, and Articles of Union, 341— '350 

Extract from the Review of Primitive Truth and Or- 
der, contained in the Anti-Jacobin Magazine, exhi- 
biting a Reply to Dr, CampbeWs Commentar\j on the 
Words of Ignatius'-^^'' There is but one Altar as 
there is but one Bishop," 351 — o6^ 

A Review of Haweis* Church History, in zvhich the 
Errors and Misrepresentations of that Work are de- 
tected and exposed, 355—411 



INTRODUCTION. 



XF there be any one truth, in embracing which it might 
be supposed that the intelligent part of mankind would uni- 
versally agree, it is surely the importance of religion, and 
the necessity of attending to what it recommends, for pro- 
moting the interests of society on earth, as well as prepar- 
ing men for the happiness of heaven. Viewing the matter 
in this light, it is impossible but that every serious think- 
ing person, who wishes well to his country, must sincerely 
lament the unhappy divisions, which have so long agitated 
the public mind, on a subject so interesting as the nature 
and tendency of true religion. However justifiable sepa- 
ration may be in some cases ; and however necessary at all 
times, for the friends of truth and righteousness to with- 
draw themselves from the tents of error and ungodliness; 
still it cannot be denied that the numerous sects and parties 
into which the Christian world has been divided, and their 
almost endless diversity of religious opinions, must be con- 
sidered as one of the heaviest calamities with which man- 
kind have ever been visited. Nor need we be at much 
pains to point out this wild variety of sentiment respecting 
the doctrines of the gospel, as the most common source of 
infidelity, and most powerful support of irreligion; since 
we find it daily appealed to as such, and therefore Industrie 
ously encouraged by those " perverse disputers," who, ra- 
ther than embrace the " pure undefiled religion" of Christ, 
allow themselves to be completely " spoiled through philo- 
sophy and vain deceit." 

Nothing seems to be better known, nor more carefully 
improved, by the adversaries of our common faith, th^i? 



iO INTRODUCIION. 

the advantage they derive from those unhappy dissentions^ 
by which the family of Christians, which an Apostle calls 
the " Household of faith," is divided against itself. In la- 
menting the effects of such shameful division, the church of 
Christ may justly say, in the words of the Psalmist, — " It 
is not an open enemy that hath done me this dishonour 5 
but even those who were once my companions, who took 
sweet counsel together with me, and walked in the house 
of God as friends." Such " offences," however, we are 
assured, " must needs come ;" even although a " woe be de- 
nounced against those by whom they come." We are also 
forevvarned, that there must, and will be heresies, factions 
and parties distinguished by their false and destructive 
principles j " that they who are approved" by their steady 
adherence to truth, unity and order, " may be made mani- 
fest."-— Such then being the divided state of what is called 
the Christian Worldj those who have promoted the pre- 
sent work do not hope to produce any thing like general 
unanimity in a country such as this, wh^re so many jarring 
opinions are entertained on the subject of religion. — ^The 
object which they have in vieAV is of less extent, and there- 
fore more likely to be accomplished. The design of this 
publication is to offer some arguments in defence of Episco- 
pacy in general, and particularly that of Scotland ; and to 
persuade such of the inhabitants of this country as profess 
to be of the Episcopal Communion, to walk worthy of that 
profession.^ by acting in a manner consistent with it, and 
endeavouring to support the constitution, and preserve the 
unity of that small remnant of the old established church, 
which still happily exists in this part of the united kingdom. 
There is no article of the Christian faith, as laid down in 
our public creeds, that seems to be so strangely misunder- 
stood, and so little attended to, as that in which we are 
taught to profess our belief of the " holy catholic church." 
And the mistakes and inattention so prevalent with regard 
to this important article are the more to be regretted, as the 



INTRODUCTION. It 

baneful consequences arising from this unhappy cause do 
daily exhibit an increasing tendency to disorder, confu- 
sion, and every evil work. It is no doubt by preserving 
the bonds of ecclesiastical unity, that Christians are to be 
kept in the way of obedience to the one God, and depen- 
dence on the one Mediator. It has, therefore, been justly 
obsen^ed by an eminent writer, that, " if ever this subject 
of the church of Christ, now so much neglected, and al- 
most forgotten by those who are most concerned to under- 
stand it, should come to be better considered, there would 
be more true piety, and more peace, more of those virtues 
which will be required in heaven, and which must there- 
fore be first learned upon earth. Some amongst us err, 
because they know not the Scriptures ; and others, be- 
cause they never considered the nature of the church. 
Some think they can make their own religion, and so they 
despise the word of God, and fall into infidelit}^ Others 
think they can make their own church, or even be a church 
unto themselves ; and so they fall into the delusions of en- 
thusiasm, or the uncharitableness of schism." 

These are the pertinent remarks of a learned divine of 
of the church of England, and they are enforced by an ob- 
servation so justly expressed, and so well adapted to my 
present purpose, that I must take the liberty of presenting 
it to the notice of those for whom this publication is more 
particularly intended. " But, as there is nodiing to en- 
lighten the minds of men in the doctrines of salvation, but 
the word of God; so there is nothing that can unite their 
hearts and aft'ections, but the church of God, Ye are one 
bread, and one body, saith the Apostle ; one body by par- 
taking of one bread ; and that can only be in the same com," 
mimion,^^^ Impressed therefore with the truth and import- 
ance of what is here so justly asserted, and earnestly de- 

* See the preface to an Essay on the Church, by the late Rev, William" 
Jones, of Nayland, in Suffolk. 



U INTRODUCTION. 

sirous of its producing the same effect in the minds of 
those for whose benefit I am now writing, I shall beg leave 
to request their serious and impartial consideration of the 
subject before us; while, taking a view of the general state 
of religion in this countiy, and the danger to which it is 
exposed, from professed infidels on the one hand, and from 
the fanatical abettors of enthusiasm on the other, we look 
back through all this mist of modern confusion, to the pri- 
mitive order and uniformity of the church, and see what 
necessity there is for our continuing still in the " Apostles' 
doctrine and felloivslup^'* as the only source of order and 
guard of uniformity. — We shall then close our view with 
such a brief, but, I trust, satisfactory account of the ecclesi- 
astical orders and administrations of the Episcopal Church 
in Scotland, as, notwithstanding the violent attack which 
was lately made upon it by a learned Professor of the 
establishment, may tend, by the blessing of God, to con- 
firm the regard and attachment of its present members; to 
promote a becoming union among all those who profess 
to be of the Episcopal persuasion in this part of the king- 
dom ; and to furnish them with proper arguments for the 
vindication of those sound and salutary principles, by 
which they have the happiness to be distinguished. 

It is an observation of undeniable certainty, that the 
same Divine Being, the Almighty Lord of heaven and 
earth, who has given to man the good things of creation 
for the use and benefit of his body, and the precious truths 
of revelation for the instruction and comfort of his soul, 
has in both instances met with the most ungrateful and 
unworthy returns. The good things of creation have been 
abused to the basest purposes of riot and intemperance, 
consumed in sin and sensuality, and often made a pretence 
for indulging covetousness and ambition, a sordid parsi- 
mony and griping avarice; v/hile the precious truths of 
revelation have been treated with the most insolent scorn 
<uid contempt, exposed to all the wantonness of raillery and 



INTRODUCTION-. is 

ridicule, and often so strangely perverted, as to pi-oduce no- 
thing but blind superstition and enthusiastic presumption. 

It is not enough, however, that we acknowledge in ge- 
neral the truth of this melancholy observation : let us ex- 
amine whether such a charge be strictly just, when applied 
to the inhabitants of this land, the country with which we 
are most immediately connected. Perhaps, when compar- 
ing our moral character with that of other states and king- 
doms, we may feel an inclination at once to resist the 
charge, because our country cannot in justice be accused of 
such flagrant abuses of the divine goodness as are too often 
exhibited in other parts of the world. But before we allow 
ourselves to be carried away by any such superficial and 
flattering comparison, we shall do well to consider, whether 
this moral superiority, which at present we undoubtedly 
possess, may not be more justly ascribed to a want of 
means and opportunity of carrying the pursuit of sensual 
and worldly pleasure to the same height with our richeif 
neighbours, than to any want of inclination, from principle, 
to the abuses which I have been mentioning. It seems 
therefore a doubtful point, whether our virtue in this re- 
spect is to be traced to the proper source and principle of 
all that deserves to be called virtue, or whether our being 
" delivered from much of the evil" that prevails in other 
places, may not be ascribed to the favourable circumstance 
oi our not being so much " led into temptation." But 
whatever may be said, either for or against our national 
character, on this score, it can only be applied to the first 
branch of the charge to which I have alluded, as pointing 
to that presumptuous abuse of the good things of creation, 
the criminality of which will no doubt be in proportion to 
the share that is enjoyed of these temporal blessings ; and 
those, to whom little is given, will surely have the less to 
account for. But as to the other part of the charge, in 
which our country is implicated, as professing to be Chris- 
tian, and enjoying the full benefit of divine revelation, I am 



U INTRODUCTION. 

afraid, that in the contempt, or abuse of its precious truths, 
as much guilt and depravity will be found here, in propor- 
tion to our numbers, as in the other parts of the united 
kingdom. 

From the advantages which Scotland has long enjoyed 
in the way of literature, and the easy access thus afforded 
to the general acquisition of knowledge, has arisen the 
powerful temptation, which many have been unable to 
withstand, of carrying their speculations beyond the proper 
limits, and affecting to be wise even in matters of religion, 
above what God has caused to be written for man's instruc- 
tion. While such speculations, however, were confined to 
the student in his closet, their influence was narrow and 
circumscribed; and the general state of society was but lit-^ 
tie affected by the writings of such infidels as Damd Hume^ 
till they were better suited to vulgar capacity, and their 
deadly venom more widely circulated, by the poisonous 
arts of Thomas Paine, and his numerous disciples. These 
could not fail at last to attract the notice of government ; 
and by its firm and steady exertions, a stop has been put to 
the open and avowed propagation of principles so hostile to 
the morals, the peace, and good order of society. Yet it is 
much to be feared, that in many parts of the kingdom, the 
seeds of irreligion and licentiousness have been so plenti- 
fully disseminated, that unless their growth be checked by 
a returning sense of duty, or some powerful interposition 
of Providence, before they come to full maturity, inevita- 
ble ruin must be the consecjuence. Already do the presa- 
ges of such a fatal issue begin to exhibit themselves. In 
some of the most populous districts of Scotland, where the 
middling and lower ranks of the people were, some years 
ago, exemplary in the discharge of their religious duties, 
not occasional neglect only, but a constant derision, and art 
avowed contempt of these duties, have now taken place. 
The rites and ordinances of the gospel are exposed to 
every species of scorn and ridicule. Children are wilfully^ 



INTRODUCTION. 1> 

tvrithheld from the " laver of regeneration ;" and men and 
women " count the blood of the covenant, wherewith they 
are sanctified, an unholy thing, in pure despite of the spirit 
of grace." 

The attainment of superior wisdom has been the boast of 
the free-thinking tribe in every age, and in every nation ; 
and much mischief has been done to the cause of Chris- 
tianity by the sophisms of schoolmen, and the introduction 
of that false philosophy and vain deceit, the offspring of 
metaphysical subtilty, through which so many in the higher 
ranks of life have been completely " spoiled and led 
away after the rudiments of the world, and not after 
Christ." Yet comparatively small was the injury, so long 
as the poor had the gospel preached unto them ; so long as 
the mass of society was uncontaminated, and the great 
body of the people esteemed themselves happy in enjoying 
the comforts of religion, and " counted all things but loss, 
for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus their 
Lord." The paitition-wall, however, between learned and 
unlearned, is now in this respect broken down. The adepts 
of the new philosophy have availed themselves of the faci- 
lity, with which the lower classes of the people may be 
tempted to get rid of this distinction ; and, if we may bor- 
row the figurative language of the Psalmist, " the boar out 
of the wood doth now waste it, and the wild beast of the 
field doth devour" and tear in pieces, the gospel of that 
** God of hosts," who proclaimed himself " the true vine ;" 
even the " Shepherd of Israel," of whom the same Psalm- 
ist declares, that " he is our God, and we are the people of 
his pasture, and the sheep of his hand." — 'What a pity it is 
that the grievous wolves of atheism and apostacy should be 
allowed to enter in among us, clothed as they are in the 
lambskin dress of fraternal benevolence, and universal phi- 
lanuiropy ; under which guise, " speaking perverse things 
to draw away disciples after them," they spare not the 
flock of Christ, but are daily carrying off unstable souls to 



16 INTRODUCTION. 

the destruction that awaits them! To whom, but to that 
same mlght}^ Shepherd of Israel, who neither shimbereth 
nor sleepeth, can we look for such aid and protection as arc 
necessary to defend us from these enemies of our peace ? 

But, while we fly to him for shelter, earnestly praying 
that he would take us under " the shadow of his wings, 
until these calamities be overpast," we must be equally 
careful to beware of the modern " false prophets," and not 
listen to the pretensions of such as are ever seeking to 
exalt themselves, by going about and saying, " Lo, here is 
Christ, or lo there ;" for Christ himself hath left this warn- 
ing with us — " Not every one that saith vmto me, Lord, 
Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven ; but he that 
doth the iviU of my Father which is in heaven."* Now 
this heavenly Father being the God of order, not of confu- 
sion, his will must in every thing accord with his work ; 
and we are to discover what his will is, fi^om v/hat he has 
done for the purpose of revealing it to us. His doings^ no 
doubt, may be often " marvellous in our eyes ;" but no 
man, who is not actuated by the most palpable presumption 
and sejf-confidence, will dare to infringe, or pretend to 
alter, the order of God's works, whether they refer to his 
operations in the economy of nature, or of grace. Bold 
and assuming as the naturalist too often is, he never ha* 
attempted to invert the seasons ; to make the sun rule by 
night, and the moon by day; to oppose the stars in their 
courses ; to bring the winds out of their treasures, or to 
allay the fury of the tempest by his unavailing " peace, be 
still." How then should any one pretend to alter the 
system of things spiritual ; — to change the economy of 
grace ; — to disjoint the whole frame of religion, by oppos- 
ing the revealed will of God, and setting aside the laws 
and institutions of his divine appointment? Yet all this 
may be jusdy laid to the charge of those wild enthusiasts^ 

* St. Matthew vii. 21. 



INTRODUCTION, I}' 

w^ho, full of the assurance of faith, and the inward expe- 
rience of a self-confident mind, enroll themselves among 
the elect of God ; and, certain, as they suppose, of being 
saved themselves, look down with contemptuous disdain on 
those humble Christians who are yet content to " work out 
their own salvation," in the way that God has prescribed, 
** with fear and trembling." — A doctrine, which thus tears 
away from the human heart every solid motive to a holy 
and religious life ; which tells us, in language as plain as 
these people can possibly make use of, that if we are in the 
number of the elect, there is no fear, and if we are not, 
there is no hope : Such a doctrine, the abettors of it, no 
doubt, justly suppose, would require to be supported, not 
by human authority, but by an immediate testimony from 
Jieaven; and therefore the modern preachers of this new 
gospel, despising the commission which our Lord gave his 
Apostles, to be handed down by regular succession, have 
all at once assumed to themselves a title, by which they 
would make the world believe that they have now the 
only mission from heaven that exists upon this earth, the 
peculiar privilege of preaching what they are pleased to call 
the Gospely m. opposition to all that the church of God has 
hitherto received under that venerable name. 

How long this delusion, which is now spreading so wide 
through every part of the kingdom, may prevail, it is not 
easy to say ; as the power of delusion is strong, both when 
it would appear to be on the side of religion, and when it 
operates in a contrary direction. Attempts have been 
made, by something like ecclesiastical authority, to stop the 
progress of this growing evil, and to administer<?a remedy 
to those who are infected by this missionary phrensy ; a 
sort of possession more worthy of one who has his " dwel» 
ling among the tombs," than of those who reside in the 
habitations of men ! But they who prescribe the remedv, 
ought to understand well the nature of the disease, and be 
able to trace the malady to its proper source. People who 



IS INTRODUCTION. 

admonish others to beware of falling into any dangeroias 
error in matters of religion, ought themselves to be exempt 
from the mischief, against which their admonition is direct* 
ed. Such warnings come with an ill grace, and therefore 
with no great probability of doing much good, from those, 
who, perhaps it will be said, derive their own ministry 
from the same contempt of a regular apostolic mission, of 
which they now see such alarming consequences, as have 
at last produced a wish to prevent their farther increase. 

In the midst of all this confusion, this melancholy depar- 
ture from PRIMITIVE TRUTH AND ORDER, we of the Epis- 
copal Communion have the credit and comfort of reflecting, 
that nothing has been said or done on our part to promote 
or encourage such wild deviation from the paths of true re- 
ligion, the ways of unity, peace and love, which our blessed 
Redeemer marked out for all his faithful foUowers.-^It is 
true, we are separated, and must continue to be separate 
from the establishment of this country; not as influenced 
by a spirit of opposition to whatever is established either in 
church or state (which seems to be a prominent feature in 
the doctrine of these new Apostles), but because we act on 
principles which require and justify such separation ; and 
which, if well understood, and duly adhered to, would en- 
sure stability to every sound establishment, and prevent 
those unhappy divisions, which serve only to multiply 
error, and drive men farther and farther from the truth as 
it is in Christ. 

Such as I have now described it, is evidently the situa- 
tion of the land in which we live, with respect to the reli- 
gious ch^^acter of a great majority of its inhabitants, very 
much resembling the state of things in the Jewish church, 
at the time of our Saviour's first coming into the flesh, 
when the true religion was either totally set aside by the 
infidelity of the Sadducees, or sadly corrupted by the 
vile hypocrisy of self-conceited Pharisees. The former, 
led away, like our modem Illuminaiiy with a vain affecta- 



INTRODUCTION. igr 

tion of superior discerivment, coiild not bear the thoughts 
of submitting their enlightened understandings to the fa- 
miliar tenets of a vulgar faith. They must have a creed of 
a different form, perfectly suited to what they are pleased 
to call Reason^ and the Fitness of things. This has been 
the idol of the unbelieving race, in all ages and places of 
the world. And though the vanity of their scheme has been 
often exposed in the clearest manner, and to the full satis- 
faction of eveiy serious, sober- thinking person; yet it would 
seem to require the same divine eloquence now as it did 
foi*merly, to " put the Sadducees to silence." 

But though it were possible (and with God it cannot be 
impossible) to check the licentious railings of these " bold 
disputers, who even deny the Lord that bought them ;" 
denying, either that they are bought, or that he who bought 
them is the Lord— -the eternal. Almighty Jehovah; the 
true faith has yet another sort of enemies to combat with, 
in the imitators of those pharisaical pretenders to religion, 
of whom St. Paul gives a most just and striking descrip- 
tion in these words—-" For I bear them record, that they 
have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For 
they, being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going 
about to establish their own righteousness, have not sub- 
mitted themselves unto the righteousness of God."*— Sub- 
mission to the righteous will and appointment of God was 
no part of the religion adopted by that zealous ignorance, 
the effects of which are here so minutely described ; and 
similar effects are still flowing from the same unhappy 
cause. The pride of infidelity, we may well suppose, is 
not a little cherished and supported by the gross absurdi- 
ties which prevail among many of those who profess to 
believe the great truths of the gospel ; and who, in flying 
from the ruinous paths of the impious sceptic, are often 
sadly bewildered in ways of their own devising, and plunge 

* Rom. X. 3, 3. 



^ INTRODUCTIOlsr. 

themselves into all the follies of the wild enthusiast* There 
seems to be a strange propensity in many of our country- 
men to be misguided by such as thus go about to deceive ; 
and who, to carry on their deceit the more effectually, lay 
it down as an undoubted maxim, very flattering to the va- 
nity of the human heart, that any man who can read, may, 
with the scriptures in his hands, be able to know and do 
every thing necessary to salvation. But this, though partly 
true, is not die whole truth ; and well-meaning people 
ought to be put on their guard against such an artful mis- 
representation. Had the scriptures contained only a few 
moral precepts, tending to preserve the peace of society, 
and to regulate man's conduct towards his neighbour, with- 
out prescribing any sacred rites and institutions, as a testi- 
mony of his submission to the will of his God, the maxim 
I have mentioned might have been assumed with more 
propriety. But is this really the case ? Has a man, in 
order to be made a Christian, nothing more to do than to 
go to a bookseller's shop and purchase a bible, that he may 
peruse it at his leisure and interpret it as he thinks fit? 
With all the liberality which this age possesses, no one has 
yet ventured to assert so much in plain terms, although the 
loose opinions, which so generally prevail, clearly show, 
that too many are guided by no other principle. 

In tracing these and many other growing evils to their 
proper source, we may easily find their original in that 
lamentable ignorance of the true nature and constitution of 
the Christian Church ; and of consequence, that tot^ want 
of regard for the order and succession of its ministers 
which have, of late years, so wofully prevailed among us ; 
encouraged and countenanced by a numerous set both of 
preachers and authors, whose interest it is to flatter men 
in this fashionable error, and take advantage of it. Hence 
it is, that the Christian world has been bewildered and led 
astray by so many unfaithful histories of the church, and 
such ill-digested lectures on that subject, as could only 



INTRODUCTION. 2i 

come from persons who found it necessary to touch these 
things very tenderly, because the ground on which they 
stood in their official character, was not so firm as to bear 
them up in any other language than that of the false pro- 
phets of old, " who spoke smooth things, and prophesied 
deceits, because the people loved to have it so." A writer 
of another stamp, the late pious and learned Bishop of 
Norwich, in laying before his clergy a brief account of the 
great fundamental doctrines which they were to inculcate, 
as essential to Christianity, and without which, it cannot 
be considered as a religion true in itself or beneficial to us, 
takes care to include in the number of these important doc- 
trines, the Constitution and Use qf the Church; " a subject 
on which," he says, men's principles for some years past 
'' have been very unsettled, and their knowledge preca- 
rious and superficial."^ — We need not wonder that this 
should be the case, when men are at so little pains to ac- 
quire that sound substantial knowledge, which is absolutely 
necessary to settle their principles, and give them just and 
suitable ideas on a subject of such serious and striking im- 
portance, as was ascribed by the blessed Author of our 
religion, to the way and manner, the purpose and design of 
his building or raising that society, which he was pleased 
to call his churchy and which he no sooner entered on his 
public ministr}^, than he began to establish.f 

Now that this church of Christ, thus established by 
himself in person, and afterwards enlarged by his Apostles, 
on the plan which he had laid down for their direction, 
ought to be considered as a regular, well formed society, 
is evident from the names and allusions by which it is 
described in the sacred writings. It is there represented 
as a body^ a household or family^ a city^ a kingdom; and 
must certainly bear some kind of relation to what these 
terms are generally known to imply. Indeed, no one who 

* See Bishop H<jrne's Charge, p. 21; f See St. Matthew xvi. 18, 19- 



22 INTRODUCTION. 

reflects for a moment on the nature of these figurative 
expressions, can be ignorant wherein it is that this relation 
or connection takes place. The church is a ^o^f/ having 
many members, of which Christ is the head. The church 
is a " household^'* ox family y of which Christ is the master,*--. 
" of whom the whole family is named;" and into which 
being admitted by baptism, we receive the spirit of adop- 
tion, whereby we are allowed and enabled to call the great 
Lord of heaven and earth our Father. The church is also 
called the " city of the living God j" and Christians are 
said to be " fellow-citizens with the saints :" and it is of- 
ten mentioned as a kingdom^ of which Christ— -the King of 
saints — is the Almighty Sovereign, " to whom all power 
is given, in heaven and in earth." In all these respects, 
the church must be considered as an outward and visible 
society, possessing all the powers and privileges, and im- 
posing on its members all the relative duties implied in 
the allusions which I have now quoted. As a hody^ all 
the members must be joined to the head, and to one an* 
other, that they may receive life and motion for the dis- 
charge of their several functions. As a family^ its Al- 
mighty Father must in every thing be the guide and di- 
rector of his children, appointing for them the proper teach- 
ers and masters, and training them up in the way of life, 
from which they must never depart. As a householdy the 
church must not be divided against itself: that it may 
stand, it must be upheld in unity and order, and by sub- 
mission to such wholesome discipline, as in the charitable 
institutions of this world is found necessary to be imposed 
on all who are admitted to share in the liberality of the 
founders. As a city and kingdom^ the church must be 
watched over, and governed by its proper officers, deriv- 
ing their spiritual power and authority from that heavenly 
Sovereign, who is King of kings and Lord of lords. 

Such then being the light in which we are taught to view 
the nature and design of that holy and heavenly society, 



INTRODUCTION, 2;j 

which in scripture is called the church; let us now cast a 
veil over the confusions of these latter days, and set our- 
selves to inquire after the order and uniformity of the 
primitive ages of Christianitj^; when the doctrine and 
fellowship of the Apostles were strictly and steadfastly 
adhered to, and Christians continued most faithfully and 
conscientiously " in the things which they had learned, 
and been assured of, knowing of whom they had learned 
them." And as in the course of this inquiry, it may be 
necessary, for the truth's sake, to speak of things as they 
really ai-e, and not " call evil good, and good evil, or put 
darkness for light, and light for darkness ;" it is hoped 
that such candid and honest dealing will not be misinter- 
preted as the indication of an uncharitable, or illiberal, 
mind; but jusdy considered as proceeding from an earnest 
desire to promote the salvation of men, and to join fer- 
vently in the pious wish and petition of the church, as ex- 
pressed in one of lier daily prayers, " that all who profess 
and call themselves Christians may be led into the way of 
truth, and hold the faith in unity of spirit, in the bond of 
peace, and in righteousness of life." 

How then can any want of true charity, or what de« 
serves to be called liberality, be with justice imputed to 
him, who, in his professional character, is doing all he can 
for the benefit of his fellow Christians, and is not willing 
diat any of them should be lost, if he can help it t WiU 
toothing serve to constitute a liberal-minded Christian, but 
that lukewarm indifference, which is totally unconcerned 
about every thing connected with religion ; which looks 
on all professions as alike safe, provided men be sincere, 
and sees no reason why every one may not hope to " get 
to heaven" in his own way t Do we judge thus in matters 
of less consequence, and where the interests of the present 
life only are concerned? Is he applauded as a liberal- 
minded physician, who, seeing his patient indulge himself 
in «very thing that tends to nourish disease and impair the 



Si INTRODUCTION. 

constitution, flatters him that all shall yet be well ; and that 
he does right to go on in his own way ? Is he applauded 
as a liberal-minded lawyer, who tells his client, that he 
need give himself no trouble about the laws and govem- 
tnent of this country ; since, in order to preserve the rights 
and liberties of a British subject, he may be as well di- 
rected in every thing by the municipal code of France, or 
Russia, or any other country ? Is the commander of ar- 
mies applauded as a liberal-minded soldier, who, in the 
day of batde, leaves his troops without orders or instruc- 
tions of any kind, and lets them fight the enemy in the way 
that seems best to their own judgment? Why then shoidd 
the teacher of religion be applauded as a liberal-minded 
divine, whose only merit lies in " speaking peace, where 
there is no peace," and leaving the people to grope for the 
wall of salvation, the pillar and ground of truth ; when by 
pointing it out, through the mist of modem error and 
delusion, as " a city set on a hill," which is at unity in itself, 
he might direct their eyes to that which is the only sure 
refuge from sin and misery, the only place of safety to a 
guilty world, and, therefore, ought to be " the joy of the 
whole earth." Conscious, therefore, of possessing no other 
spirit than the spirit of Christian charity, and actuated by 
no other motive than the desire of promoting the glory of 
God, and the good of my Christian brethren, I shall pro- 
ceed to establish the following plain and important facts> 
as matters of undoubted certamty, and worthy of the most 
serious consideration. 

I. That the Christian religion, being, like its divine 
Author, " the same yesterday, to-day and for ever," ought 
to be received and embraced, just as it is represented and 
held out in the scriptures of truth, without " adding there- 
to, or diminishing from it." 

II. That the church of Christ, in which his religion is 
received and embraced, is that spiritual society in which 
the ministration of holy things is committed to the three 



INTRODUCTION. ^S 

distinct orders of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, deriving 
their authority from the Apostles, as those Apostles re- 
ceived their commission from Christ. And, 

III. That a part of this holy, catholic and apostolic 
church, though deprived of the support of civil establish- 
ment, does still exist in this country, under the name of 
the Scotch Episcopal Church; whose doctrine, discipline 
and worship, as happily agreeing with that of the first and 
purest ages of Christianity, ought to be steadily adhered 
to, by all who profess to be of the Episcopal Communion, 
in this part of the kingdom. 



CHAPTER 1. 

/ 

jr//€ Christian Religion^ bein^, like its Divine Author, " the 
same yesterday, to-day and for ever,"** ought to he re^ 
ceived and embraced just as it is represented and held out 
in the Scriptures of Truth, " without adding thereto or 
diminishing from it. ^^ 

i HE truth of this proposition is so evident, as to admit 
of no sort of doubt in the minds of those who are rightly 
instructed i» the knowledge of divine things : and there 
cannot be a more agreeable subject lof Christian medita»-.w> 
tiQn, than to survey the various means and instruments by 
which God has been pjeased to convey this comfortable in- 
struction to man. For this purpose we are assured, that 
the same " God, who at sundry times, and in divers man- 
ners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 
hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son."^ The 
only difference, which is here pointed out to our notice, 
refers tp the times and to the manners in which God hath 
spoken; for under all this variety with respect to the mode 
of revelation, the subject was the same, and the speaker 
the same, the voice of the one true God proclaiming the 
'' one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ 
Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all,"t It was in 
consequence of his giving this all-sufficient ransom, that he 
became that powerful Mediator, who alone could make 
peaqe between heaven and earth ; and who, according to 
the terms of the everlasting covenant of grace and mercy, 
did of his own free love, and unmerited goodness to man, 
graciously undertake to make reconciliation for iniquity, 
and to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself; which sacri- 

* Heb. i.l, 2. t ITim. ii. 5, 6. 



^S Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 

flee, an Apostle tells us, " was verily fore-ordained before?- 
the foundation of the world."* Hence it is that the plan of 
this glorious design is so often mentioned in scripture a» 
God's purpose, which he had purposed from the begins 
ning — ^his " eternal purpose, which he purposed in Christ 
Jesus oiir Lord ;"t his '•" purpose and grace, which was 
given us in Christ Jesus, before the world began ;"J which 
had been fore-ordained, or predestined in the counsel aind 
decree of the blessed and glorious Trinity, who had been 
pleased to bind themselves by an everlasting covenant to 
the accomplishment of it. This, we have ground to be- 
lieve, is the true scriptural notion of predestination ; not 
any absolute, unconditional decree for the salvation of 
particular persons ; but only God's general purpose and 
resolution of sending his Son into the world, " that whO' 
soever believeth in him, should not perish, but have ever- 
lasting life."§ With a view to this merciful purpose, the 
scripture describes, in terms sufficiently adequate to th© 
human capaicity, the several parts, which the three per- 
sons in the Godhead, and man too by their appointment, 
have to act in this blessed scheme, according to the brief 
account given of it, by a venerable writer of the primitive 
church, in these words — " the Father Well pleased, the 
Son administering and forming, the Spirit nourishing and 
increasing, man himself gradually profiting and attaining 
towards perfection."|| Such is the beautiful representation, 
which may be dfawn from scripture, of the mysterious 
scheme of salvation provided for fallen man ; and of the 
several parts, which the adorable Three in Jehovah have 
been graciously pleased to assign to themselves in carrying 
on this mighty work of love and mercy to the human race. 
" Known unto God are all his works from the beginning 
of the world," particularly that which is the crown and 



* 1 Peter i. 20. f Ephes. iii. 11. | 2 Tim. i. 9. 

§ St. John iii. 16. f] Irenseus, book iv. chap. Ixxv. 



Frhnitive Truth and Order vindicated. 29' 

glory of all the rest, the redemption of mankind by the 
sacrifice and death of his beloved Son. But had not this 
act of mercy been also revealed and " made known" to 
men, as soon as their situation required such a comforta- 
ble discovery, they could have had no hope of being re- 
conciled to God; no encouragement to serve the Lord 
with gladness, or to declare with grateful joy, " that his 
mercy is everlasting, and his truth endureth to all genera- 
tions." It was justly observed by a writer of distinguished 
rank in this country, " that if it was the intention of God 
to pardon man ; to reclaim him from his sinful state ; to 
encourage him to love, fear, and serve his Creator, and to 
restore him to a capacity of performing such acceptable 
service, it was absolutely necessary, for promoting thatl 
design, to acquaint man with his intentions ; to give such 
proof of those intentions as should convince and thoroughly 
persuade those to whom the revelation was made, and to^ 
preserve such evidence of that revelation to jnankind, as 
should be sufficient to support their faith and hope, and give 
them ground to rejoice in the God of their salvation."* 
Now all this has been done in the most complete and satis- 
factory manner, by that same wise and gracious God, in 
the unity of whose essence we are taught to believe, that 
" there are three who bear record in heaven" to the eternal 
purpose of man's salvation ; and who have not left them- 
f elves without witness on earth to that covenanted scheme 
of grace, mercy and peace, which was in much compassion 
exhibited to fallen man, as soon as his deplorable condition 
called for the comfort which was thence to be derived^ 
The words, in which the inspired historian relates the pro* 
mise of mercy, are, " that the seed of the woman should 
bruise the head of the serpent ;" that there should, in the* 
fulness of time, be bom of the posterity of Eve a Re- 

* See Some Thoughts concerning Religion, life, by the late Honomabie 
Duncan Forbes, Lord President o^' the Cotrrt of Sessions. 



30 Primitive Truth mid Order vindicated, 

fjeemer or Deliverer; who, by making satisfaction for the 
$ins of men, and restoring them to the love and favour of 
their offended Maker, should thereby bruise the head, 
and destroy the power and dominion of that old serpent 
the devil, who had beguiled our first parents into sin, and 
gained, as he thought, a signal triumph over them. 

Thus early was the gospel preached, and the glad 
tidings of salvation published to the human race.— -The ac- 
count given of it by Moses is short and concise; but the 
revelation itself, as coming from God, was no doubt full 
and explicit. One thing is obvious, that the change which 
took place in Adam's condition, as the consequence of his 
fall, would necessarily lead to a correspondent change in 
jhis religious service : and we may reasonably conclude, 
that such a form of worship would be instituted, as might 
exhibit his dependence on the covenant of grace entei^d 
into by the three great ones in deity, one of whom was 
to unite the human nature with his own, and as God mani- 
fested in the flesh, to do and suffer whatever was neces- 
sary for man's salvation*^ Accordingly we find, that when 
Adam's transgression required his expulsion from the 
earthly paradise, and his entrance on a state of salutary 
discipline, and a new system of faith and trust in his God> 
a certain emblematic representation was placed at the east 
of the garden of Eden, exhibiting the ever-blessed Trinitj 
as joined in covenant to redeem man, and the union of the 
divine and human natures in the person of the Redeemer. 
The Cherubim^ and the glory around them, with the divine 
presence in them, were to keep or preserve the way of the 
tree of life, to show man the way to life eternal, and keep 
him from losing, or departing from it*']' Before this emble- 

* See some very pertinent remarks on this subject, in a volume of ex- 
cellent discourses on the great docirine of ato?iement, lately published — by 
the Rev. Charles Daubeny, LL. B. author of a Guide to the Church. 

f I know it has been thought, that this venerable figure called the 
CherubiTn was &et up to the eastward of Eden, tncrely as a guard to keep 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 31 

matic representation, which was afterwards, by divine 
command, set up in the tabernacle of Moses, and temple of 
Solomon^ the church or people of God were taught to per- 
form that t\'pical service, which pointed to Christ, as the 
way^ the truth^ and the life^ and kept up among them a 
constant remembrance, that " without shedding of blood, 
there Was no remission of sin." 

It was to preserve a due regard to this fundamental arti- 
cle of religion, that God was pleased to appoint sacrifices 
of expiation and atonement for sin, and required such ser- 
vices to be observed through all succeeding generations, till 
the Redeemer himself should come, who was to do away 
all these shadows and emblems, and to make the true satis- 
faction, the only proper atonement. In proof of the earli- 
ness of this institution, it has been very justly remarked. 



unhappy Adam from coming at the tree of life, and so the mysterious 
account here given of it has been much exposed to the scoffs and ridi- 
cule of unbelievers. On this subject we find the learned -Lord President 
Forbes, in his Thoughts concerning Religion, thus delivering his sentiments 
■with great plahtness. — " The Jews, who have misconstrued the angel 
Jehovah into a created angel, have thought fit here to understand by the 
Cherubiin two of the same sort of angels, who had got a flaming sword, 
to frighten Adam from re-entering Eden, and meddling with the fruit 
of the tr^ee cf life : and this monstrous story they have made out of a, 
text, that necessarily means no such thing, and may fairly be construed to 
a sense big with the most important information to mankind. What is 
translated, to keep the luay cf the tree of life, with intent to prevent the 
coming at it, may as properly be rendered, to observe, or for observing^ 
and so discovering and finding out, the ixiay to the tree of life. And the 
word we translate /)/(Zcef2^, is almost always in every text translated inha- 
Sited'* (as in a tent or tabernacle) ; ** and whether you translate it placed 
or inhabited, the next word ought to be translated the Cherubim, as things, 
or onbletns, well known to those for whom Moses wrote. So that Jeho- 
vah's placing or inhabiting these Cherubim, was the method chosen by 
him, to make the way to the tree of life kept or observed.'* See more to 
the same purpose, tending to show that the Cherubim of the scriptures 
were mystical figures of high antiquity and great signification, being, as 
Irenaeus calls them, " Resemblances of the dispensation of the Son of 
God/' that is, the Christian economy. 



32 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated* 

that the skins, with which God is said to have clothed thtf 
nakedness of our first parents, must have been the skins of 
beasts, that had been offered by them in sacrifice, since at 
that time they were not allowed to kill them for any other 
purpose : And this typical clothing was a most comfort- 
able emblem of that covering and protection from divine 
wrath, that garment of salvation provided for man, by the 
sacrifice of the Lamb of God, who was to take aw^y the 
sin of the world. 

The rite of sacrifice being thus established by divine; 
authority, as the instituted emblem of redeeming love, it 
may well be supposed, that Adam and his family would bfe 
ready to testify their grateful acceptance of that love, and 
dependence on it, by a regular application to the means ap- 
pointed for directing the eye of the faithful offerer to that 
great atonement, which the blood of the slain animal was 
designed to shadow forth. Indeed, we are expressly in- 
formed, that the two sons of Adam, Cain and Abel, 
brought each of them an offering unto the Lord,^ but with 
this remarkable difference, that God is said to have " had 
respect unto Abel, and to his offering, while unto Cain, and 
to his offering, he had not respect :" The reason of which 
is given in these words of the Epistle to the Hebrews; " By 
faith, Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than 
Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, 
God testifying of his gifts."t This it was that made the 
difference between his sacrifice and Cain's, that the one 
offered by faith, the other did not ; by faith in the promised 
Redeemer, and from a humble hope of being accepted 
through his merits. And indeed this difference appears in 

* Gen. iv. 3, 4. Where this offering is said to have been brought to tlxe 
Lord " in process of thnc," or, as it is translated on the margin of our 
Bible, at '* the end of days " or on the periodical return of that day, which. 
had been sanctified from the beginning, and thereby more immediatelj 
set apart for the celebration of religious worship. 

I Heb, xi. 4s 



Primitive Truth and Order vi?idicated. $f^ 

the very nature of their gifts or offerings. For Cain 
brought only of the fruit of the ground, as an acknowledge- 
ment of the divine bounty, in providing for his temporal 
support, and giving him a right to what the ground pro- 
duced. But he showed no desire to act in conformity with 
that divine plan of salvation which the fall had rendered 
necessary for his spiritual comfort. He offered no living 
creature as an atonement for sin, and whose blood was to be 
shed as an acknowledgement of the forfeiture of life, and 
as a type or emblem of the all-atoning sacrifice of the great 
Redeemer. In short, he conducted himself as if he had 
wished to make it appear, that he had no sin to be atoned 
for, no belief in the one Mediator, and no thought of ap- 
plying to God, through faith in his meritorious ransom. 
Whereas Abel, conscious of his fallen state, and the now 
sinful condition of man, offered a living creature to God, 
" the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof," as the 
instituted type or memorial of the great First-born^ through 
whose sacred blood the life that had been forfeited was to 
be restored. For which reason Abel is said to have offered 
hy faitk^ and the Lord had respect to his offering, on ac- 
count of the excellence which was thereby stamped upon it, 
and the typical relation which it bore to the sacrifice of that 
beloved Son, in whom God has been ever well-pleased. 
But the offering brought by Cain had no such qualities : It 
meant no expiation for sin, nor any acknowledgement of it ; 
It was not made in faith ; nay, it was so far from having 
respect to the Divine Intercessor, that it might rather b© 
considered as a formal rejection of his intercession; and 
therefore it was rejected, and God had no respect to it, or 
to the offerer. In this early and remarkable instance we 
may see a lively representation, on the one hand, of the 
humble and devout Christian, who, after all his most sincere 
and diligent endeavours in the way of his duty, yet, con- 
scious of his own infirmities, relies upon the merits of his 
Saviour ; and on the other hand, a representation of those, 



^ Primitive Truth and Order vindicated* 

who either ascribe too much to their own merits, or, by a 
fatal misapprehension, neglect and undervalue that only- 
method of atc«iement and acceptance, through which God 
hath declared, he will be reconciled to sinners. 

We have no reason to think that God was any " respecter 
of persons," in the case of Cain and Abel, as recorded in 
the sacred history ; for it was the different quality of their 
offerings, and the different dispositions with which they 
were offered, that occasioned the difference of respect 
which was shown to them : and I have insisted the longer 
on this instance, because it gives us so plain, and so early 
an account of the origin of sacrifices, and the true meaning 
and design of them. It shows us that sacrifice had an evi- 
dent reference to the promised Redeemer, and being insti-» 
tuted on the first declaration of mercy through him, and 
carefully observed by the first family of the human race, 
was by them transmitted to all mankind. Hence we may 
easily perceive, how the notion of expiating sin, and ap- 
peasing the offended Deity by sacrifices, became so univer- 
sal, and spread itself into the most distant ages and coun- 
tries. When the sons of men began to multiply, and to 
disperse themselves in colonies upon the face of the whole 
earth, they never failed to carry these sacred rites along 
with them, as well knowing how precious a treasure they 
contained j and that in the religious and due use of them, 
they might humbly expect the forgiveness of their sins, and 
the favour of God, through the efficacy of that all-sufficient 
sacrifice, which they typically represented, and which was 
5n the fulness of time to be offered for the sins of the whole 
world. We need not wonder then, that in these primitive 
ages, men were so tenacious of such important rites, and 
took all due care to evince the high opinion they entertained 
of them, as the appointed emblems of that stupendous 
transaction, on which rested all their hopes of pardon, and 
peace with God. 

After the account, which the inspired historian gives us, 



Primitive Truth and Order lihidicated'. 3^ 

of the acceptance of Abel's offering, and the rejection of 
Cain's, who, in consequence of " the voice of his brother's 
blood crying from the ground, went out frona the presence 
of the Lord, a fugitive and vagabond in the earth," we meet 
with little, except Enoch's translation, that is particularly 
descriptive of the character of God's faithful people, till the 
day arrived, when, " by faith, Noah being warned of God, 
of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark 
to the saving of his house, by the which he condemned the 
world, and became heir of the righteousness, which is by 
faith."* Such was the effect ascribed by an apostle to the 
faith of Noah, who, notwithstanding every appearance to 
the contrar)^, being jfirmly convinced that the flood would 
cofle, according to the Divine warning, went on with his 
awful preparation, and found that safety and protection iff 
his righteous course, which were denied to the world of 
the ungodly. " His friends and neighbours, who had 
either neglected, or presumptuously derided his pious ad- 
monitions, looked in vain to him for help! There was no 
hiding place ^ no refuge from the stornty but within the ark 
*— .and God had shut the door. The waters, which soon 
rose above the highest hills, bore all away with irresitible 
force ; the day of acceptance was o\'er, and the night of 
judgment closed in for ever, on a corrupt and perverse 
generation."t But even then, though the pillars of the 
earth were shaken from their foundation, and its apostate 
and rebellious inhabitants were swept away by the over- 
whelming deluge, the building of God, the work of re- 
demption was not overthrown. The church of the Re- 
deemer, now confined to eight persons, remained safe and 
secure 4 And as soon as Noah had gone forth out of the 

* Heb. xi. 7. 

f See this subject treated with uncommon strength and elegance of 
expression, in Sermons preached at Laura Chapel, Bath, during the seasons 
of Advent, 1799, by the Rev. Francis Randolph, D. D. 

\ There is a beautiful allusion to this circumstance in one of the 



S6 Primitive Truth and Ordei* vi?idkated, 

ark, and he and all that it contained were placed agaiit 
upon a new world, we find him entering on the renewed 
duties of life, with an act of worship to his merciful Pre- 
server- " Noah builded an altar unto the Lord, and took 
of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered 
burnt offerings on the altar."^ From the distincticai of 
clean beasts and fowls, which is here so particularly men- 
tioned, it is evident, that these offerings, as well as this 
distinction, must have been made by divine appointment ; 
and the life of these creatures was taken away, and their 
blood, shed, as a memorial of that everlasiing covenant, 
through the blood of which, life was to be restored to man. 
It was this divine life-giving covenant, the establishment 
of which was promised to Noah before the flood, andflhe 
promise repeated after it to him and his sons, in the same 
strong expressive terms — " And I," says God, " behold I 
establish 77iy covenant with you ;"')' thus challenging an ex- 
clusive property in it, and pointing it out as his own act 
and deed; not as a thing, which had then only begun to 
take place, but had been of long standing, and was now by 
this solemn promise so ratified and established, as to give 
the strongest ground of assurance that it could not fail, but 
would stand fast for ever. 

We have seen how the terms of this covenant were 
proposed to Adam after his fall, and means appointed for 
preserving the remembrance of them, and confirming a 
dutiful dependence on them. With the same view they 
were renewed to Noah, both before and after the flood ; 
and God, we are told, was pleased to set his bow in the. 

prayers of the OfEce of Baptism, wherein we beg of that " Almighty • 
God, who of his great mercy did save Noah and his family in the ark 
from perishing by water, that the child — or infant voyager, being deli- 
vered from his wrath, may be received into the ark of Christ's churchy 
and so pass the waves cf this troublesome world, that finally he may come 
to the land of everlasting life." 

* Gen. viii. 20. ^ f Gen. ix. 5* 



Frimitii>e Truth and Order vindicated, 37 

eioud, as a token of his covenant, a pledge of his mercy 
to man, through the merits and mediation of that mighty- 
One, whom St. John saw sitting " on the throne in heaven, 
and there was a rainbow round about the throne."^ Yet 
with this emblem of God's power and goodness staring 
them in the face, the descendants of Noah soon began to 
forsake the ways of the Lord, and at last filled up the 
measure of their iniquity, by that idolatrous confederacy, 
which occasioned their dispersion at Babel. Thus " scat- 
tered abroad upon the face of all the earth," they departed 
also from the worship and service of the true God ; and all 
would again have been lost in idolatry and corruption, had 
not the divine mercy interposed for the preservation of 
truth and righteousness. For this purpose, the wisdom of 
heaven judged it necessary to separate some one individual 
from the degenerate mass of mankind ; and the person se- 
lected was the patriarch Abraham, called by God to be the 
father cf the church of the Hebrews, an^ of the promised 
seed, which was to bruise the head of the serpent. Th» 
history of this distinguished character exhibits, as might 
well be expected, many wonderful interpositions of divine 
providence, tending to confirm the " precious promises," 
which had been made to Adam and Noah, and still afford- 
ing a clearer intimation of the council of God, and a 
stronger pledge of the immutability of his gracious purpose 
towards all the families of the earth.')' We are assured by 
St. Paul, that " the gospel was preached unto Abraham,"^ 
when it was not only revealed to him, but that revelation 
was also confirmed by an oath, that *' in his seed all the 
nations of the earth should be blessed." And the same 
apostle, reasoning on this important subject, in his Epistle to 
the Hebrews, tells us, that " when God made promise to 



* Rev. iv. 3. 

t See Dr. Randolph's excellent Sermon on the character of Abraham- 

I Gal. iii, 8. 



38 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 

Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware 
by himself. For men verily swear by the greater; and an 
oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife: 
wherein God willing more abundantly to show to the heirs 
of promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed him- 
self by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it 
was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong con- 
solation."* Now, what can these two immutable things be, 
but first, God's interposing himself^ and then the oath^ both 
showing the immutability of his counsel I And how could 
we Christians derive consolation from this solemn transac- 
tion, unless it referred to a covenant of mercy, in which 
the whole race of mankind were concerned, and of which 
that partial exhibition made to Abraham, was only designed 
to preserve the memory, and secure the benefits of it to 
him and his posterity, till the seed should come, to whom 
the first promise was made ; even that promise which was 
also ratified with an oath, and of which it is said—" Jeho- 
vah hath sworn, and will not repent, thou art a priest for 
ever, after the order of Melchizedek."'!' St. Paul has 
clearly pointed out the person here referred to, and the na- 
ture of that unchangeable priesthood, which, according to 
the terms of the everlasting covenant, confirmed and even 
sworn to by the adorable Three in Jehovah, was to remove 
the curse from, and procure a blessing to, all the nations 
of the earth. Even Abraham himself was blessed by this 
Melchizedek, priest of the most High God ; and beholding 
his promised Redeemer under that mysterious character, 
he rejoiced to see the day of his incarnation, and our Sa- 
viour himself assured the Jews, that " he saw it and was 
glad*''\ It was with a view of enforcing conviction on hia 
unbelieving countrymen, and showing how strangely they 
had departed from the faith of their ancestors, that our 
Lord gave them this assurance ; thus proving himself to 

* Heb. vi. 13, 16, ir, 18. f Psalm ex. 4. % St. John viii. 5%. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 39 

have been the object of hope and dependence to their 
venerable progenitor, and that all the predictions and pro- 
mises made to the faithful Abraham, were now fulfilled 
in him, whom yet they would not believe, because he told 
them the truth. Very different were the opinion and be- 
haviour of one of their own priests, the father of John the 
Baptist, who, on the birth of his son, as the appointed 
forerunner of the Messiah, gave thanks to the " Lord God 
of Israel, because in visiting and redeeming his people, he 
had remembered his holy covenant, and the oath which he 
sware to their father Abraham."* From the subject of 
this oath, as described in what follows, it is evident, that 
Zacharias, on this remarkable occasion, was taught and 
directed by the holy Spirit, to celebrate the redemption of 
the world by the promised Saviour, as the great objfect of 
God's holy covenant, ratified by the oath of Jehovah, and 
shadowed out in all the types and figures which exhibited 
to the eye of faith that " tender mercy of our God, whereby 
the day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light 
to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death, 
and to guide our feet into the way of peace.""!* 

This was the mercy which, Zacharias could say, was 
*' promised to our fathers," and spoken of by all the holy 
prophets, from the beginning of the world. On these pro- 
mises and predictions was built that strong and vigorous 
faith, which supported the patriarchs in all their trials ; and 
in which they lived and died, looking forward, by the light 
which they enjoyed, to that salvation, which they knew 
was prepared, and would in due time be manifested, " be- 
fore the face of all people." It was this light, which con- 
ducted the faithful Abraham to one of the mountains of 
Moriah ; whither he was ordered by God to " take his son, 
his only son Isaac, whom he loved, and oflFer him there 
for a burnt-offering :"J And " by faith," says the Apos- 

* St. Luke i. 72, 75. t St. Luke i. 78, 79- \ Gen. xxii, 2. 



40 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 

tie, " Abraham, when he was tried^ oiFered up Isaac ; and 
he that had received the promises, offered up his onhf 
begotten son^ of whom it was said, that in Isaac shall thy 
seed be called ; accounting, that God was able to raise him 
up even from the dead; from whence also he received him 
in a figure :"^ or more literally, in a parable^ where some- 
thing more is meant than that which is expressed. The 
impending death, and unexpected deliverance of Isaac, 
the only begotten son of Abraham, are the things here re- 
lated : but the actual sacrifice, and resurrection of Christ, 
the only begotten Son of God, are the things which are 
also meant to be pointed out, with all the circumstances in 
which these will be found to agree with what is recorded 
of Isaac ; of whom " God said unto Abraham — In Isaac 
shall thy seed be called," and St. Paul affirms, that this 
seed " is Christ."t 

As it is particularly mentioned in the history of these 
patriarchs, that " after the death of Abraham, God blessed 
his son Isaac,"J as the type or representative of the pro- 
mised seed ; so when Isaac was old, and had blessed his 
son Jacob, as chosen of God for the same purpose, we are 
informed of a very striking vision, in which *' Jacob be- 
held a ladder set upon the earth, and the top of it reached 
to heaven, and behold, the angels of God ascending and 
descending upon it ; and behold, the Lord stood above it, 
and said — I am the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and 
the God of Isaac :"§ after which follows a renewal of the 
promise made to both these fathers-—" In thee, and in thy 
seed, shall all the families of the earth be blessed." So 
this vision, with the blessing which accompanied it, was 
intended td confirm the patriarch's hope and trust in the 
one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ 
Jesusj who himself alluded to this symbolical appearance, 

* Heb. xi. 17, 18, 19. % Gen. xxv. 11. 

t Gen. .xxi, 12, and Gal. iii. 1§. ^ Gen. xxviii. 12, 15. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 41 

when he said to Nathanael— .an Israelite indeed — -" Here- 
after you shall see," what Jacob's vision prefigured, " Hea- 
ven open, and the angels of God ascending and descend- 
ing," not on a ladder, but on him that was represented by- 
it — '' upon the Son of man."^ But this was not the only 
encouraging assurance, which the patriarch Jacob received, 
that the *' God of Bethel" was to be " in Christ, reconciling 
all things both in heaven and earth to himself." This same 
God was pleased soon after to exhibit a most wonderful 
support to the hope of his future incarnation, by appearing 
as a man to this distinguished patriarch, and wrestling with 
him^ for the sake of changing his name from Jacob to 
Israel^ and showing what power he had both with God and 
with men^ as a Prince: alluding thereby to the name which 
he had just received ; for Israel properly signifies-—'"* a 
prince of God/'f Though this appears to have been a very 
mysterious transaction, we can plainly discern, that the 
person who wrestled with Jacob was a divine person, 
even " Jehovah God of Hosts." For so we read in the 
book of the prophet Hosea, that " Jacob had power with 
God; yea, he had power over the angel, and prevailed: 
he wept, and made supplication unto him: he found him in 
Bethel, and there he spake with us, even Jehovah God of 
Hosts: Jehovah is his memorial :"J Agreeably to what the 
same God said to Moses — " Thus shalt thou say unto the 
children of Israel ;•— Jehovah — the God of your fathers, 
the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of 
Jacob, hath sent me unto you. This is my name for ever, 
and this is my memorial unto all generations."|| From 
which it is evident, that this name Jehovah is his memo- 
rial^ his appropriate, perpetual, incommunicable name ; 
and what follows is ** a most gracious declaration of this 
Jehovah's peculiar connections with the fathers of the Isra- 



• St. John i. 51. I Hotea xii. 3, 4, 5. 

t Gen, xxxii. 24-— 29. 11 Exod. iii. 15. 



42 Primithe Truth and Order vindicated, 

elites."* Depending as he well might on this powerful 
connection with Jehovah, as his God^ we find " Jacob, 
when he was a dying, by faith blessing both the sons of 



* So says on6 of the ablest biblical scholars of the age, the profoundly 
learned Dr. Horsley, lately Lord Bishop of Rochester, now of St. 
Asaph; who, in an advertisement at the end of his admirable translation 
of Hosea, adds the following Remark to his note on the word " onemo- 
rial" (F. p. 143.) which most beantifully illustrates cur present subject r 
namely — That the person, of whom it is said, that the name yehovah 
is his memorial, is no other than he whom the patriarch found at 
Bethel, who there spake with the Israelites in the loins of their pro- 
genitor. He, whom the patriarch found at Bethel, who there, in that 
manner, spake with the Israelites, was by the tenor of the context, 
the antagonist, with whom Jacob was afterwards matched at Peniel. 
The antagonist, with whom he was matched at Peniel, wrestled with 
the patriarch, as we read it the book of Genesis, in the human fornj. 
The conflict was no sooner ended, than the patriarch acknowledged his 
antagonist as God. The holy prophet first calls him angel, f and after 
mention of the colluctation, and of the meeting and conference at Be- 
thel, saySjij: that he, whom he had called angel, was " Jehovah God of 
Hosts." And to make the assertion of this person's godhead, if possi- 
ble, Still more unequivocal, he adds — that to hinn belonged, as his ap» 
propriate memorial, that name, which is declarative of the very essence 
of the Godhead ! This MAN, therefore, of the book of Genesis, this 
ANGEL of Hosea, who wrestled with Jacob, could be no other than the 
Jehovah -Angel, of whom we so often read in the English bible, under the 
name of the " angel of the Lord." A phrase of an unfortunate structure, 
and so ill conformed to the original, that it is to be feared, it has led 
many into the error of conceiving of the Lord as one person, and of the 
angel as another. The word of the Hebrews, ill rendered " the Lord,'* 
is not, like the English word, an appellative expressing rank or condi- 
tion ; but it is the proper name yehovah. And this proper name Jthovah 
is noty in the Hebrew, agenitive after the noun substantive •' Angel," as- 
the English represents it; — but the words in the Hebrew translated ye- 
hcfvah and Angel, are two nouns substantive in apposition, both speaking 
of the same person ; the one, by the appropriate name of the essence, the 
other by a title of ofEce. " jfebovab-Angei" would be a better rendering. 
The Jehovah-Angel of the Old Testament is no other than He, who Ir 
the fulness of time, " was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin 
Mary." 

t Hosea xii. 4. | Hosea xii. 5. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 43 

Joseph ;"* and in so doing, addressing himself to that 
^ God, before whom his fathers Abraham and Isaac did 
walk ; the God, which fed him all his life long, the Angel 
which redeemed him from all evil ;"t which plainly showed 
that the hope of a Redeemer^ under the character of the 
Shepherd of Israel feeding his flock with all good things, 
was to be handed down in the family of Joseph ; whose 
typical history served to confirm that " hope of the promise 
made of God unto the fathers ; unto which promise," says 
St. Paul, " oui/ twelve tribes, instantly serving God day 
and night, hope to come. "J 

The history of these twelve tribes of Israel, as recorded 
in the sacred writings, opens to us a wonderful source of 
evidence in support of the proposition now before us : And 
by considering what these people were; how they were 
supported by tlie power, directed by the wisdom, and in- 
structed in the knowledge of Jehovah the true God, we 
shall readily perceive their typical relation to his Christ, 
the Saviour of the world, and the proof, which their whole 
economy clearly exhibits, that the religion of this Saviour 
was the same yesterday under the law, as it is to-day under 
the gospel, and will continue for every even unto the end 
of the world. 

The rise and progress of the Jewish nation is one of the 
most surprising things to be met with in the page of history. 
Descended from these distinguished patriarchs, whose faith 
and piety we have been now contemplating, they were 
taught to look upon themselves as the peculiar objects of 
his providential care, who had so often declared himself to 
be " the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob," — .Conducted 
by his merciful providence into the land of Egypt, they 
were there reduced to the most humiliating state of bon- 
dage; from which they could find no rehef, till the four 
hundred years were expired, which, in tiie wise and mys- 

* Heb, xi. 21. t Gen. xlviii. 15, 16. % Acts xxvi. 6, 7. 



44 jprmitive Truth and Order vindicated^ 

terious designs of heaven, had been fixed as the period of 
their affliction. Emerging at last from this grievous depth 
of servitude, and delivered from their cruel oppressors by 
a most miraculous display of Almighty vengeance, they be* 
came a great und powerful people; possessed their promised 
land for many years, with the full exercise of their rehgion, 
and in the firm belief, derived from their sacred writings, 
that an extraordinary person, of their blood and kindred, 
was to arise, who should deliver them from all their ene- 
mies, and set upon a kingdom above all the kingdoms of 
the earth. Encouraged by this opinion, and totally mis" 
apprehending the character of their expected Deliverer, 
they rejected him, when he came; and quarrelling with the 
power which had them in subjection, after the most obsti^ 
nate defence that ever people made, they were utterly over- 
thrown, their city and temple destroyed, and those that 
escaped the sword, were scattered among all nations; 
where their posterity continue to this day, cut off from all 
the powers and privileges possessed by those among whom 
they reside ; distinguished only by their peculiar obser* 
vances, and a firm conviction, that their religion is from 
God, and their great Deliverer is still to come. 

These are wonderful circumstances, and call for extraor- 
dinary attention. They afford the strongest arguments in 
favour of the Christian religion ; since all that has hap- 
pened to these scattered tribes of Israel was distincdy and 
repeatedly foretold in those scriptures of the Old and New 
Testement, on whose combined evidence, the truth of our 
glorious gospel rests with unshaken firmness. Often do 
we find it predicted in these sacred records, that the Jews 
should not only despise and reject, and even put to death 
the promised Messiah, and on this account be dispersed 
into all countries, and exposed to the greatest hardships ; 
but also, that they should not be swallowed up, and lost 
among their conquerors, as has generally been the case 
with all vanquished nations, but should still subsist to latest 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 45 

times, and under all their distresses and difficulties, be a 
distinct people. And how amazingly has this prophecy 
been fulfilled ! Yet the pen, which divine inspiration 
guides, could hardly have pointed to a more singular oir 
improbable occurrence. Nothing has happened like it in 
the course of human affairs. All the mighty monarchies, 
both of the east and west, are vanished like the shadows 
of the evening, with the setting sun ; their places know 
them no more ; while this contemptible race of fugitives 
are strangely secure without a friend or protector amidst 
the wreck of empires. There are some people now, as in 
our Saviour's time, who " will not believe, except they see 
sig-ns and wonders." Let them look at this prodigy, which 
is daily in their view, and try if they can possibly account 
for it in any other way than by allowing it to be " the 
Lord's doing, and, therefore, so marvellous in our eyes." 

Marvellous indeed must it appear, that a people so highly 
favoured of God ; selected from all others to be his pecu- 
liar charge, and by his mighty hand rescued from bond- 
age ; conducted through numberless dangers and difficul- 
ties, and at length settled in a country destined for their 
habitation, and there constituted the guardians, as we may 
say, of the divine oracles and institutions, should yet 
abandon the great object, which all these marks of distinc- 
tion had in view ; be totally expelled from the land, which 
the Lord their God had given them, and rendered wholly 
incapable of performing the peculiar rites of their religious 
service ; having neither altar, priest, nor temple, nor anv 
vestige left of what the law required for making their so- 
lemn sacrifice. Does not all this plainly show that the law 
of Moses, in this respect, being already fulfilled, has no more 
its original end to answer ; and that the whole Jewish eco- 
nomy, being but the shadow of good things to come, has 
very properly given place to the substance — to " the body 
"B^hich is of Christ r"* He was the real, permanent object 

* Col. ii. 17. 



-46 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 

shadowed out by all these figurative, temporary represen- 
tations of the JVIosaic ritual ; and the whole order of the 
sacrifices, the whole disposition of the tabernacle, the 
whole ministry of the priesthood, pointed to him as the 
" one true propitiatory sacrifice, the true tabernacle, which 
the Lord pitched, and not man — the eternal High Priest, 
who is passed into the heavens, there to make continual in- 
tercession for them that come to God by him." To him 
give all the types of the law, as well as " all the prophets 
witness ;" and it was solely on his account, that the people 
of Israel were kept together, and supported by a train of 
miracles ; for on his leaving the world, when his work 
here below was finished, this chosen nation was dispersed 
over all the earth, and its policy completely dissolved. 

Such then being the true nature of the legal dispensation, 
and such the design of the whole Israelitish economy, the 
question needs no longer be asked — " Wherefore then 
serveth the law V The same Apostle, who states the ques-s 
tion, gives also the proper answer ; when speaking of the 
promise of mercy made to Abraham, he tells us, that the 
law was " added because of transgressions, till the seed 
should come," that is, Christ, " to whom the promise waa 
made."^ By saying that the law rvas added^ he plainly in- 
timates, that there was something known and practised be- 
fore, to which this addition was made ; and what could 
that be, but the evangelical promise renewed to Abraham, 
and the worship and obedience required, in consequence 
of that promise, to which the law was added by way of 
preservation, and in order to lessen transgression for the 
time to come \ Through the corruption of the patriarchal 
religion, many sorts of transgression prevailed among the 
heathen nations, who took their rise from the confusion at 
Babel, and grew up into the wildest idolaters, worshipping 
their imaginary deities with such abominable practices a^ 

* Gal. iii. 19r 



Primitive Truth' and Order vindicated, 47 

made them hateful to the true God, and of course very- 
dangerous neighbours to those who still believed in him, 
and adhered to his service. For this reason God was 
pleased to raise a Wall of division between the Hebrews 
and the heathens, and laid his people under every possible 
obligation that might preserve them from mingling with 
those that served other gods, and learning their ways. 
As a wise and good parent would keep his children from 
the seducing company of profligates and blasphemers, so 
did the Almighty Father of heaven and earth guard his 
holy family from all the abominations of that bewitching 
idolatry, by which they were surrounded. " Ye shall be 
holy unto me," said God to the children of Israel, " for I 
the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other people, 
that ye should be mine."* 

Thus claiming them as his children, he had also conde- 
scended to provide a schoolmaster for them, to teach them 
the rudiments of heavenly knowledge, and so train them 
up in the true faith and fear of their God. " The law->" 
says St. Paul, " was our schoolmaster unto Church ;"f 
was designed to instruct those who lived under it in the 
character and office of the expected Messiah ; for which 
purpose, as scholars are confined in a school, so were they 
separated from the world, to learn and practise continually 
those signs and figures, by which this wonderful person 
was described to them. Nothing can be more plain and 
distinct, than the precepts and institutions of the law, if the 
mere outward act and observance of them had been all that 
was required. Yet we find, it was the fervent desire and 
earnest prayer of those who had a just sense of this matter, 
that God would teach them, and make them to understand 
the precepts of his law, in which they were commanded to 
" meditate day and night." And that this constant medita- 
tion was necessary to unravel the true meaning and design 

* Levit. XX. 26. f Gal. iii. 24 



48 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 

of it, will sufficiently appear, if we only consider one of 
its most striking and solemn institutions, the rite of sacri- 
fice, or shedding the blood of living creatures as an offer- 
ing to God ; which surely required a considerable degree 
of attention in discovering the end and object of it, as well 
as the disposition with which it ought to be performed. 
It is not onlv contrary to the common sense and reason of 
mankind, but declared by an inspired Apostle to be abso- 
lutely " impossible, that the blood of bulls, and of goats, 
should take away sins."^— -There was no such inherent 
value in the blood of these victims ; nor could any neces- 
sary connection be supposed between the slaying of these 
or any such creatures, and the saving of a sinner. But 
then what was wanting in their general nature, was made 
up by special institution; and these animals, being once 
devoted and set apart for this service, acquired a new rela- 
tion, and of consequence a value from the substance, of 
which they were only types and shadows. The offering of 
these was then only acceptable to the Deity, when it was 
considered as his own appointment ; and in consequence of 
a due attention to the hidden things of the law, was per- 
formed with faith and humility, as a memorial of that 
Lamb of God, who was in due time to be manifested^ that 
he might take away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 

In contradiction, however, to this train of reasoning, so 
clearly confirmed by the authority of scripture, it has been 
supposed, that the practice of worshipping the deity by 
sacrifice was merely a human invention, and kindly ac- 
cepted by God, only in compliance with the weakness of 
his creatures.— -Nay, it has been assigned as one consider- 
able reason for God's sending his Son into the world to 
take away sin by the sacrifice of himself, that this was a 
wise and gracious condescension to that strong apprehen- 
sion, and persuasion, which had so early and universally 

* Heb. X. 4. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindkafed. 'i|# 

prevailed among rtiatiklnd, conceftting the eolation of 3ih, 
and Jippeasing the offended Deity by sacrifices of living 
creatures. But can it really be imagined, with ^ny sort of 
reason or propriety, thjtt the all-wise purposes of heaveft^ 
and the unsearchable counsels of God, should be directed 
of influenced by the vain conceits and inventions of men ; 
or that the customs of a blinded and corrupted world should 
furnish a proper pattern for the divine proceedings ! No, 
certainly: The mysterious dispensation, which produced 
the sacrifice of the Son of God, had a much nobler, and a 
more appropriate original. It was the result of the greatest 
Aiercy conducted by infinite wisdom, aad rests on no other 
foundation than the immutability of that divine counsel 
which was confirmed by an oath ; that everlasting cove- 
riant for nian's redemption entered into by the adorable 
TThree in Deity, before the world began. This was th^ 
source of that gracious undertaking, which prepared ^ 
body for the promised Redeemer, in which he might do 
atid suflFer the will of God, by giving hiniself a ransom for 
Itoan ; and from this all-sufficient and meritorious sacrifice, 
which in the purpose of God was offered from the founda- 
tion of the world, proceeded not only the institution and 
acceptance of those offerings which we read of, as brought 
to the Lord by his own people, but also the corruption and 
abuse of this institution, which prevailed among the hea- 
thens, and gave rise to all their abominable superstitions. 
For, as has been justly observed in a late excellent publica- 
tion, " had there been no true religion, there could not 
have been any that is false. Had there been no divine in- 
stitutions, superstition would have had no foundation on 
which to have raised its imaginary superstructure. The 
very abuse of sacrifice, therefore, proves the divinity of its 
origin. For to the perversion of sacred tradition, are the 
corruptions of heathenism to be traced up :* And as the 

• See p. 303. of th« Rev. Charles Daubeny's volume of Discourses orji 
The great Doctrine of Atonement, where we meet with the following verjr 

7 



\ 



50 Pri7nitive Truth and Order vindicated. 

Deity repeatedly and formally disclaimed all virtue, consi- 
dered as inherent in the sacrifices themselves, the Divine 
appointment of them could have no other object in view, than 
to direct the eye of the offerer to that great atonement, which 
the blood of the slain animal was designed to shadow forth; 
being the appointed emblem of that precious blood, which, 
according to the eternal purpose, was to redeem the life of 
man. In like manner," says the same learned author,^ 
'' the offering up that commemorative sacrifice, which cha- 
racterizes the Christian altar, is an acknowledgment on our 
parts, that our lives were forfeited, and have been re- 
deemed by the body and blood of Christ, actually offered 
up on the cross. Bread and wine are but-^the instituted 
emblems, deriving all their spiritual efficacy from the rela- 
tion they bear to that important transaction, which they 
were appointed to represent. Thus the typical sacrifice of 
the Jewish temple, and the commemorative one of the 
Christian church, direct our thoughts to the same divine 
object of contemplation ; each in its peculiar way furnish- 
ing a figurative exhibition of the recovery of man from the 
effects of the fall, through the mediation of that divine 

apposite note. — " The more this subject, the most fruitful in the whole 
compass of literature, is investigated, the more satisfied shall we be^ 
that the images of heathen idolatry were but the corruptions, according 
to the imaginations of men at different times, of that primitive symbo- 
lical representation, originally set up at the fall, for the purpose of pre- 
serving the faith, and characterizing the worship of the true religion. 
The reader has only to go far enough back, and he will arrive at the same 
divine fountain, to which the pure stream of patriarchal religion, and the 
corrupt one of heathenish superstition are to be traced up. Mr. Maurice, 
in his Dissertation on the Oriental Trinities (which by bringing the coun- 
terfeits, the Fagan Triads, to prove the realities, thereby makes the cor- 
ruption of revelation bear testimony to the truth of it) has done mucH in 
assisting the reader in this interesting research. If the reader would be 
further assisted, he will find more useful, because more correct, informa- 
tion upon it in the Trinitarian Anaiogy, by that most excellent divine, the 
late William Jones;" to be found in vol. i. of his Theological, Philoso- 
phical and Miscellaneous Woi-ks, published in -1801. - • 

* P. 360, 361. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 3i 

person, who by the all-sufficient sacrifice of himself, be- 
came the Redeemer of a lost world." 

We have now taken a short view of the Jewish economy, 
or law of Moses, in the light wherein Sti Paul represents 
it ; not only as a necessary addition to the patriarchal reli- 
gion, for preserving God's people from the idolatry and 
wickedness of the heathen nations, but also as " a school- 
master unto Christ," leading men by the discipline of its 
types and shadows to the knowledge of real and substantial 
truths ; in which capacity, our Lord himself tells us — that 
" the law prophesied until John the Baptist ;" till he suc- 
ceeded it in that office,-— who seeing Jesus coming to him, 
spoke the ver}'^ language of its institutions, when he said 
— " Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin 
of the world."^ 

This too has been the language of prophecy from the 
very beginning of the world ; and as soon as we look into 
the prophetic writings of the Old Testament, we find them 
unfolding the design of the Redeemer's coming, and the 
process of the redemption wrought by him, in the fullest 
and most particular manner. We are told, that a great 
Person was to come, bringing peace and salvation to aU 
nations ; who should be Immanuel or God with us ;— bom 
of a virgin, poor and obscure, yet one whom David calls 
his Lord; — the Lord to whom the temple belonged, — the 
mighty God,— -a great King, — an everlasting Priest— a 
Prophet like unto Moses, but much greater; who should 
be anointed by the spirit of the Lord God, to preach the 
gospel to the poor, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and 
comfort to the mourners, and to heal the broken-hearted ; 
— who should work miracles of the most merciful and bene- 
ficent kind; and yet, notwithstanding all his power and 
goodness, should be rejected by the greater part of his 
nation ; be despised and afflicted ; a man of sorrows, and 

* St. John i. 29. 



&i PrimU'voe Truth and Order vindicated. 

acquainted with grief ; accused by fi^lse witnesses ; betrayed 
by an intimate friend; sold for thirty pieces of silver; 
treated by his enemies in the most barbarous manner, and 
at last put to a shameful and tormenting death ; while all 
the time, he should be led like a lamb to the slaughter, 
pot opening his mouth, but to pray for his enemies, and 
make intercession for the transgressors. All these and 
Jiftany moi'e circumstances of the same kind pointed so 
clearly to what really happened in the land of Judah, and 
were so punctually fulfilled in the person of Jesus of Naza-^ 
reth, that it is astonishing how the Jews could overlook the 
Striking evidence afforded by so many plain and literal pre-.' 
dictions. Perhaps at the time when these things were pas* 
sing before them, and they themselves were promoting the 
accomplishment of this awful myster}^, they might have 
been so blinded by pride and prejudice, as not to see or 
consider what had been done, or what they themselveg 
were doing. But after they had got time to reflect on all 
that had happened, and to compare it with what had been 
prophesied ; we may indeed wonder how they failed t9 
perceive where the truth lay, and honestly to confess, in 
the words of one of our Lord's first disciples-*-'* we have 
found him, of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did 
write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."^ 

It was to Moses and the prophets that Abraham is repre-^ 
sented in the parable, as referring the rich man's unbeliev- 
ing brethren for the evidence of a future state ;f and 
when Jesus gave this direction to his incredulous country* 
men-^-^" Search the scriptures, for in them, ye think ye 
l^ave eternal life, and they are they which testify of me ;"J 
they were the writings of Moses and the prophets^ tlie only 
scriptures then known, which thus bore testimony to him, 
as the author of eternal life ta all them that believe. With 
the same view, we find him kindly rebuking two of his 

• St. John i. 45. f St, Luke xvi. 29—31. \ St. John v. 39. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 4r0 

Ibllowei^, as foolishly backward to believe what the pro* 
phets had spoken ; and then we are told, that '* beginning 
at MoseSy and all the prophets^ he expounded unto them ia 
all the scriptures, the things concerning himself."* In imi» 
tation of his blessed Master, we find St. Paul employed in 
** expounding and testifying the kingdom of God," to the 
Jews at Rome, and " persuading them concerning Jesus, 
both out of the law of Moses ^ and out of the prophets;''''''^ 
and that this had been his constant, and most effectual me- 
thod of persuasion, appears evidently from part of his ad" 
mirable defence before king Agrippa ; wherein he declares, 
that '' having obtained help of God, he had continued unto 
that day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none 
other things than those, which the prophets and Moses did 
say should come : that Christ should suffer, and that he 
should be the first that should rise from the dead, and 
should show light unto the people, and to the Gentiles."f 

If then this eminent preacher of the gospel, in the testis 
mony which he bore to the truth of it, said none other things, 
than what Moses and the prophets had said should come, 
with regard to the sufferings, and exaltation of the expected 
Messiah, — -the light of the Gentiles, and the glory of his 
people Israel ; the obvious and necessary inference to be 
drawn from these premises is, that there is no other differ- 
ence between the preaching of Moses and the prophets, 
and that of an Apostle of Christ, but this-— that the 
former points to the promised Saviour, as yet to come; 
the latter exhibits him as already come. — But he is in fact 
the sum and substance of both parts of divine revelation ; 
and what is called the New Testament, containing the 
writings of Apostles and Evangelists, speaks no other lan- 
Iguage than what the Old Testament had spoken before by 
Moses and the prophets, respecting the scheme of man's 
salvation, except in so far as relates to the way and manner 

* St. Luke xxiv. 3r. f Acts xxviii. 23. % Acts xxvi. 22, 23. 



S4f Primitive Truth and Order 'vindicated* 

in which that gracious scheme was exhibited to the world. 
The Old Testament went before, to announce what was 
to be dehvered in the New : and the New Testament came 
after, to interpret the Old: but both, like the Cherubim 
over the mercy seat, bear a constant and friendly aspect 
towards each other, united in^ and intent upon carrying 
on, one and the same gracious design of promoting the 
glory of God in the salvation of men. 

This is the view in which we are taught to behold these 
two dispensations of divine mercy, as distinguished by the 
characters of Old and New ; not as though they were two 
distinct schemes of religion unconnected with each other, 
but as what they really are, two parts of the same beauti- 
ful whole, mutually confirming and illustrating each other ; 
and to be considered as Old and Nexv^ only with respect to 
the time and manner of their being manifested to the 
world. It is therefore well and wisely declared in the 
seventh article of the Church of England, that " the Old 
Testament is not contrary to the New ; for both in the Old 
and New Testament, everlasting life is offered to mankind 
by Christ, who is the only Mediator between God and 
man, being both God and man. Wherefore they are not 
to be heard, which feign that the old fathers did look only 
for transitory promises." How can it possibly be feigned, 
or imagined, that they looked only for transitory pro- 
mises, when an inspired Apostle expressly assures us, that 
those whom he enumerates " all died in faith, not having 
received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and 
were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and con- 
fessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth, 
desiring a better country, and looking forward to the city, 
which God hath prepared for them ; ' even as we Chris- 
tians,' having here no continuing city, seek one to come."^ 
So it is evident, that they and we, having the same object 

* Heb. xi. 13—16. and xiii. 14. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. SS 

in view, and travelling to the same country, must be di* 
rected to it by the same means; that is, by a firm and steady 
faith in him, who is " the way, the truth and the life ;"^ 
the way in which we are to walk, the truth, by which we are 
to be guided, and the life in which our journey is to end. 

Although the dispensation, under which we live, be 
called the New Testament, we are not to suppose, that it 
differs in substance from the Old^ or points to any new way 
of salvation which was not known before. For since the 
fall of man, there has been but one way discovered for 
his recovery; one scheme of mercy, at first revealed in the 
promise of deliverance by the " seed of the woman ;" — 
represented by the emblematic appearance at the east of 
the sacred garden, — and afterwards more fully exhibited 
in the religious services, and mystical offerings of the 
*' old fathers," both before and under the law. These were 
appointed to prefigure^ what our eucharistic service is 
designed to commemorate as actually accomplished by the 
sacrifice of Christ — " the one oblation once offered for the 
sins of the whole world." Thus the Patriarchal, the Jew- 
ish, and the Christian economy, will all be found to unite in 
directing the eye of the faithful to the same object of evan- 
gelical hope, from the revelation of the promised seed to 
Adam in paradise, through the shadows of the law, to its 
designed completion in the person of Jesus Christ, — " the 
Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." And when, 
at the consummation of all things, the Patriarch, the Jew, 
and the Christian, shall be assembled before the throne 
that is set in heaven; as they will all have had but one 
source of hope here below, so will they then join in one song 
of praise, with the mystic powers on high— saying — " Bles- 
sing, honour, glory and power be unto him that sitteth on 
3the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever."'|' 

From the account that has now been given of the primi- 

* St, John xiv. 6. j Rey. v. 13. 



/' 



SS Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 

tive institution of religion, ^s founded in the immutable 
counsel of that " Father of lights^ with whom is no varia- 
bleness, neither shadow of turning ;" I think it must evi- 
dently appear, that the way of salvation, which divifte 
wisdom has marked out for the human race, is no hew 
discovery, peculiar to this or that age of the world. It is 
as old as the " way of the tree of life," of which a very 
early symbol Was appointed to keep fallen man in remeni- 
brance ; and with respect to which the last book of the in- 
spired volume delivers this encouraging promise-^" To 
him that ovefcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, 
which is in the midst of the paradise of God."^ The 
same emblem is made use of in both cases, to show that 
the means of procuring life to man have been the same 
from the beginning, and will continue to the end of the 
world* Nothing is more likely to hurt the cause of Chris- 
tianity, and obstruct it^ salutary influence on the miads of 
men, than the false notions, which prevail respecting its 
original, and the mean, degrading ideas, which some are 
disposed to entertain with regard to its Author, and the 
plan on which it was preached and propagated iti the world 
about eighteen centuries ago. Those who view it as a sys- 
tem, which was then entirely new, and had never been 
heard of before, sit down very coolly to weigh its mel-its as 
placed in the balance with the schemes of heathen philoso- 
phy, and natural divinity, which then were or since havfe 
been set in opposition to it. They do not see, or are not 
willing to see that light of evidence, which shows the truth 
and purpose of the everlasting covenant, entered into by 
the adorable Three in Jehovah for man's redemption, be- 
fore the foundations of the world were laid. They overlook 
the unity of this grand and merciful design, jmd will not 
observe that beautiful chain of connection, by which the 
promise was united with the performance^ the prophecy 

* Rev. ii. 7. 



i( 



Primithe Truth and Order vindicated^ ST 

•\yith the completion, the anticipation with the event;"* 
all tending to illustrate the character, and display the glo- 
ries of that Almighty Deliverer, who from the very fall of 
man, stood forth his Redeemer and Intercessor. They 
do not consider, that for the manifestation of this wonder- 
ful person, in whom all the nations of die earth were to be 
blessed, there was a fulness of time appointed, to which all 
the preceding dispensations looked forward ; just as there v 
is now a fulness of time determined, to which our views 
ought to be continually directed, when all the nations of the 
earth will be summoned to appear before the tribunal of 
that " just and righteous One," who came first to save^ 
and will at last come to judge the world. 

These are the great and interesting objects^ which our 
Christian principles lead us to contemplate : And when we 
survey the imminent danger to v/hich such principles are 
^Exposed, from the careless indifference which appears on 
the one hand, and the wild enthusiasm which breaks out 
on the other, both equally tending to sap the foundation^ 
and destroy the purity of the Christian faith ; surely we 
cannot but see the necessity of exerting our utmost endea- 
vours to hold fast our profession, and to fix the certainty 
and security of our belief on its only solid basis- — " the truth 
as it is in Jesus." If his religion be true, it must be so in 
every part that is now exhibited to our view ; it must have 
been always so in every period of time ; and those several 
objects, about which our faith is exercised, the creation, 
the redemption, and the sanctification of man, were all 
presented at once to the eye of Almighty love ; they all 
began together in the unchangeable purpose of Jehovah, and 
will move on in merciful procession, as the covenanted, 
confederate work of the glorious Three in one undivided 
Kssence, till time shall be no more. 

Little then are we obliged to those teachers of natural 
theology, those advocates for what is called Rational Reli' 

* See Dr. Randolph's Sermons on this sul^ject, 

8 



58 Primitive Truth and Order vihdicatedi 

gion^ who would take us out of the hands of our first, oiit 
best, our only safe instructor, to prove to us, that there is 
a God who made us, and a future state of retribution re^ 
served for us ; and after carrying us to the borders of that 
awful state, there to leave us without a Saviour, or a Sane- 
tifier, who only can enable us to pass the bounds, the great 
gulph fixed between our fallen nature and a happy immor- 
tality. Is it thus, that the light of the gospel, the meridian 
brightness of the sun of righteousness, is to receive addi* 
tional splendour from the feeble taper of human reason, the 
pitiful glimmering of what is called the Light of Nature ? 
is it thus, that philosophy is to be brought in, to the aid of 
religion ; and the emptiness of man's fluctuating judgment 
and understanding to be opposed to that fujness of wisdom 
and knowledge, which dwells for ever in the most High ? 
No : it is not by such expedients as these, that the cause of 
Christianity is to be supported, and its influence pr'omoted 
in the world* We have seen them tried in the balance, and 
found wanting* God has pei-mitted the experiment to be 
made, and under a pretence of refining and improving the 
religion of Christ, by explaining its doctrines in such a 
rational manner^ as may recommend it to more general 
acceptance, a plan has been carried on with wonderful suc- 
cess, for stripping it of all its primary importance, and hold- 
ing it up, as but a secondary object in the scale of Divine. 
Providence*^ 

* "This plan seems to be recommended by Archdeacon Paley, who 
maintains that •• he, who by a diligent and faithful examination of the 
original records, dismisses from the system one article, which contradicts 
the apprehension, the experience, or the reasoning of mankind, does 
more towards recommending the belief, and with the belief, the in- 
fluence of Christianity, to the understandings and consciences of seri- 
ous inquirers, and through them to universal reception and authority, 
than can be eftected by a thousand contenders for creeds and ordinances 
of human establishment." This no doubt is partly true, as far as " the 
apprehension, the experience, or the reasoning of mankind" may be 
opposed to " creeds and ordinances of human establishment." But arc 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 59 

With this view, it has been laid down as an incontro- 
vertible position, that what is called Natural Religion con- 
stitutes the basis of revelation, and having therefore prior 
authority, must be considered as of superior obligation. 
Accordingly, its laws are represented as eternal and un- 
changeable, antecedent to the will of God, and indepen- 
dent on it ; so perfectly agreeable to reason, and the fitness 
of things, that God as well as man, the Creator as well as 
the creature, is obliged to conform to them. The light of 
nature is thought to be sufficient for the discovery of all 
that is necessary to be known respecting the will and perfec- 
tions of the Deity ; and as this boasted light can only dis- 
cover what are called moral duties, they are said to carry 
with them a natural or eternal obligation j while positive 
duties are but mere arbitrary" commands, void of all inter- 
nal excellency. These and such like metaphysical distinc- 
tions have been eagerly laid hold of, to establish the neces- 
sity of a constant appeal to the tribunal of human reason ; 
and no precept of scripture must be received as a rule of 
duty, till it be proved to agree with the dictates of philo-* 
sophy, and its utility be tried by the standard of human 
wisdom. By thus throwing so much weight into the scale- 
of reason, and so little into that of revelation, as if every 
one had a right to frame a religion for himself; the autho- 
rity of scripture is daily more and more weakened and 
despised, the value of Christianity is proportionably depre- 

there no creeds and ordinances of divine establishment, every article of 
which must be retained as part of the Christian system, however contra- 
dictory it may appear to the judgment or apprehension of " the natural 
man— the disputer of this world V* Is there not a ♦' faith — once delivered 
to the saints," which must he " early contended for " by all who hope to 
share in " the common salvation ?" and which faith, he who maintains 
in its purity, as founded on the authority of God, does more towards 
recommending the belief andi influence of true Christianity, than *' a 
thousand such contenders" as Dr. Paley, for '< the apprehension, the 
experience, or the reasoning of mankind." See the dedication of his 
*' Principles of Moral and f*olitical Philosophy,*' t;o the Bishop of Carlisle. 



60 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 

ciated ; infidelity raises its proud aspiring head, and taking, 
advantage of the high ground on which its favourite religion 
of nature has been (even by some men of distinguished 
abilities) imprudently placed, exalts itself against that true 
knowledge of God, and divine things, which can only be 
derived from divine revelation.* 

Thus we may plainly see, that nothing has done greater 
mischief to our holy religion, than the vain attempts of some 
of its teachers to bring down its exalted truths to the stand- 
ard of human reason ; these attempts having in some 
measure invited its enemies to join issue with those that 
appear to be friendly to it, that the former may strengthen 
their hands by the unguarded concessions of the latter.-— 
So in fact it has been found, that some of the strongest, 
and most pointed attacks that have been made on Christia- 
nity, have derived their chief strength from the acknow- 
ledgment of this principle, that natural religion is the foun- 
dation of all that is instituted and revealed : a principle, 
which, as some have been pleased to consider as the ground 
of their faith, others have been bold to hold forth, at least 
with less inconsistency, as the support of their infidelity. 
And if it be true, as some Christian divines have thought 
proper to allow, that " unless all the great things contained 
in the law of nature are first known and believed, the reve- 
lation of God himself can signify nothing," it may no 
doubt he affirmed with equal confidence, that where all these 
things are already known and believed, revelation can sig- 
nify but little. For if nature and reason can so easily dis- 



* If the reader be desirous of obtaining farther information on this 
interesting subject, I would beg leave to recommend him to a work, in 
the perusal of which he will be sure to receive both the benefit and 
pleasure that must arise from complete satisfaction, and which is very 
properly entitled, The Kncnvledge of Divine Things from Revelation, not 
from. Reason or Nature. By the late John Ellis, D. D. Vicar of St. 
. 'Catherine's, Dublin, and formerly of Brazen Nose College, Oxford. 
!S-.ondon, 1771. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 61 

cover the most important truths, and be sufficient to direct 
man in the way of his duty, and lead him to the happiness 
designed for him, there does not appear to be much neces- 
sity for any other guide ; nay, there is hardly room left for 
any other, where the mind is already preoccupied with the 
sufficiency of its own powers, and feels itself in possession 
of every religious truth that is worth the inquiring after. 
The consequence of all this must be, that in proportion as 
reason is exalted, and the comprehension of the human 
mind enlarged beyond its proper limits, the importance 
and value of revelation will be just so far depressed and 
under-rated, till at last reason becomes absolutely indepen- 
dent and self-sufficient, and will either have a religion en- 
tirely of its own devising, or none at all. 

Thus does the pride of human nature tempt men to em- 
ploy the reason which God has given them, in direct oppo- 
jsition to the will and intention of the Giver, without consi- 
dering the folly and baseness of such unworthy conduct, 
and into what gross absurdities it must infallibly lead them. 
If these men would know what reason is without revelation, 
and to what it would lead them in matters of religion, if 
unassisted, and left to itself, let them consult the histories 
of those heathen nations, who knew nothing of the Old Tes- 
tament, while it was the only scripture, or who since then 
have never heard of Christ and his gospel. There they 
will soon discover what strange work their idol reason has 
made in the world ; how it has multiplied Deities like the 
sand of the sea, and " changed the gloiy of the incorrup- 
tible God, into an image made like to corruptible man, and 
to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things ;"* 
how it has led men to offer sacrifice unto devils, in a va- 
riety of forms, and in the most inhuman and barbarous 
manner ; and, in a word, that there is scarce any thing so 
absurd and ridiculous, or so monstrous and abominable, 

* Rom. i. 23. 



6^ Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 

but what the vain, self-sufficient reason of man has made 
an object of religious worship. 

To use the words, therefore, of a late admirable address to 
the patrons and professors of the new philosophy: " Let 
the modern reasoner, who would make as good a religion 
by the help of nature, and his own faculties, as we have 
received from the lights of revelation, and the doctrines of 
the gospel, take his ground where he will, provided he does 
not go without the heathen pale; and let him keep it.-— Let 
him borrow no assistance from Moses, and let him as^ime 
to himself all the lights that he can find, all the rational 
religion he can collect, not only in the world then known, 
but in the world since discovered, in all the nations of the 
east, where reason surely, as far as arts and sciences were 
concerned, was in no contemptible state ; in America, to the 
north and to the south, in all the continents and islands, 
which modern navigation has added to the map of the 
world, as the Romans knew in the Augustan age ; let him 
pursue his researches, and vvhen he has made his tour 
through all their temples and pagodas, let him erect his 
ti'ophies to reason, and publish his discoveries with what 
confidence he may. Alas ! for mankind, and the boasted 
dignity of human reason, he will bring back nothing but a 
raree-show of idols, a museum of monsters, Egyptian, 
Indian and Chinese deformities, and non-descripts, the 
creatures of earth, air and sea, snakes, reptiles, even stocks 
and stones promoted to be gods, and man degenerating, 
and debasing himself to kneel down before these dumb 
divinities, and pay them worship. — And now, if this is all 
that he, who opposes the religion of revelation, can disco- 
ver, and make prize of in the religion of reason, I give 
him joy of his discoveries, and wish him candidly to de- 
clare, if upon result of those discoveries, he can believe 
so well of himself as to suppose, that had he lived in those 
days, he would have found out any thing more than was 
found out by those who lived in them : whether, if he had 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 6$ 

singly engrossed the collected wisdom of the seven wise 
men of Greece, he would have revealed a better system of 
religion to the world than Christ has revealed ; and whe- 
ther he would have known the will of God better than God 
knew it himself, and more clearly have communicated it to 
mankind."* 

Whoever duly considers the scope and force of this rea- 
soning, can be at no loss to discover the obvious conclusion 
in favour of divine revelation ; to which it is evident, that 
men are indebted for all that pretended religion of natur© 
which they so fondly boast of, and which is no other than 
what they derived from the use of the sacred writings, and 
the instruction received from those who had the care of 
their education. Thus the revealed truths, which took 
early possession of their souls, which they were taught 
with the first rudiments of learning, and of which no per- 
son living in a Christian country can be supposed wholly 
ignorant ; these they mistake for the pure natural conceptions 
of their own minds, and ascribe to reason, and the light of 
nature, that very knowledge of divine things which they 
have derived from the gospel of Christ, and which they yet 
set up in opposition to it. But is it right and reasonable 
to treat in such a disingenuous manner the religion of him, 
who came to be, and actually proved himself to be the 
light, and life of the world t " Ought the withered hand, 
which Christ has restored and made whole, to be lifted up 
against him ? — Or should the dumb man's tongue, just 
loosened from the bonds of silence, blaspheme the power 
that set it free r'^f Yet thus basely do these men act, who 
employ the knowledge which they have from scripture, 
against scripture itself, and make use of their religion of 
nature, as an engine to batter down the religion of Christ. 

• See this sul)ject farther pursued and illustrated in an excellent little 
tract, called, A Jew plain Reaso7is viby ive should believe in Christ, and 
adhere to his Religion. By Richard Cumberland, Esq. London, 1801. 

t See Bishop Sherlock's Discourses on this subject. 



64 Prhnilhe Triilh d7id Order vindicated^ 

But little do these men consider what it really is, which, 
Under the name of Natural Religion^ they thus fondly ad- 
mire, as such a powerful weapon in the hands of infidelity: 
Little indeed do they seem to know of the true state of 
that nature from which they would derive this imaginary 
religion. For how can that system of religion be called 
natural^ which was never yet discovered by any of the 
sons of men, while left to themselves in a state of nature^ 
without a guide or instructor ? Or if it could have been 
discovered by men thus uninstructed and untutored, yet 
how could such a religion be suited to man in his present 
state, which takes no notice of any change that has hap- 
pened to him, but supposes him to be still in, that purcj 
holy and happy condition, in which he came originally 
from the hands of a pure and holy God, and, therefore, 
capable of performing such a worship and service as that 
God requires, and will accept from an innocent^ unoffend- 
ing creature ? No proposition, I think, can be more clear 
and evident than this ; that Natural Religion^ if it has any 
meaning at all, must mean that religion which is fitted for, 
and peculiar to ih^ present state of man's nature^ as some- 
thing very different from that, in which he first received 
his being. But how can that be deemed a religion at all 
calculated for man in his present state, which leaves out of 
the account the doctrines of his Jail and his restoration! 
which never tells, nor can tell him, how he died in Adam, 
and was and will be made alive again in Christ ? That " in 
Adam all died," and in consequence of the mortal nature 
received from their first parent, all his posterity are liable 
to death, is a truth no less confirmed by experience, than 
plainly declared in holy writ. But the cause, as well as the 
sting, of death is sin ; and how sin can be pardoned, and 
its effects removed from the sinner, no light of nature has 
ever been able to show, nor give any glimpse of hope, but 
what may arise from the dark, uncertain prospect afforded 
by repentance ; of which it can only be said, " who can tell 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 65 

if God will accept it V God alone could tell the terms 
on which " repentance and remission of sins were to be 
preached among all nations j and it behoved Christ to 
suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day^"* that in 
his name^ the promise of this universal blessing might be 
authoritatively declared by those commissioned for that 
purpose : " For in him," says one of these authorized 
preachers, " all the promises of God are yea, and in him 
amen ;"t in him they are all made sure to us, and by him 
are truly and effectually accomplished. 

But " remission of sins" is not of itself sufficient to fill 
up the measure of divine mercy promised to man in his 
blessed Redeemer, and which the light of nature could 
never have exhibited to the eye of faith : " there is still," 
as an eminent writer beautifully expresses it, " something 
farther that nature craves, something which with unuttera- 
ble groans she pants after, even life and happiness for ever- 
more* She sees all her children go down to the grave j 
and all beyond the grave is to her one wide waste^ a land 
of doubt and uncertainty : when she looks into it, she has 
her hopes, and she has her fears j and agitated bv the vicis- 
situde of these passions, she finds no ground whereon to rest 
her foot. How different is the scene which the gospel 
opens! there we see the heavenly Canaan^ the new Jerusa- 
lem; in which city of the great God, there are mansions, 
many mansions for receiving them, who through faith, and 
patient continuance in well-doing, seek for glory and im- 
mortality."J How properly, then, may we join in the 
words which an apostle addressed to his Saviour, " Lord> 
to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal 
life." II Thou hast exhibited in thine own person a clear 
undeniable proof, that " life and immortality are now 

* St. Luke xxiv. 46, 47. 

t 2 Cor. i. 20. 

\ See Bishop Sherlock's Discourse on St. Johnili. 16, 

jl St. John vi. 68. 

9 



6&1 Primitive Truth and Order vhidicated. 



brought to light," and therefore need not be sought In the 
dark uncertain guesses of human reason, which may serve 
well enough in the affairs of this life, and in pointing out 
some of the common duties between man and man ; but 
when it exceeds its bounds, and presumes to meddle with 
the deep things of God, and to dictate in the great points 
of religion, its weakness and insufficiency do then mani- 
festly appear. It is but " the blind leading the blind,*' and 
will sooner betray us into eiTor and danger, than deliver us 
out of them. Shall we then quit the glorious light dis- 
played in the gospel of Christ, to follow the faint and feeble 
glimmering of natural reason l Shall we seek for clearness 
in the midst of obscurity, or hope to meet with truth in 
the labyrinths of error and uncertainty? Thou blessed 
Saviour of the world ! If we leave thee, to whom shall we 
go? Where shall we find a guide like thee, a conductor so 
kind, so compassionate, so infinitely wise, so divinely mer- 
ciful ? " Thou light of the Gentiles and glory of Israel !" 
How great must be the blindness and infatuation of those 
who, refusing to be guided by the radiant beams of thy 
heavenly doctrine, walk on in the false and treacherous 
ways of their own devising, and neither discern, nor desire 
to know the truth ? What egregious folly, as well as base 
ingratitude is it, thus to spurn at all the gracious designs of 
heaven, and seek to fall back into the miserable gulfs of 
heathen ignorance and idolatry; there to lie lost and bewil- 
dered by the light of that reason which we have now been 
view^ing, as set up through all its weakness and wanderings^ 
in opposition to divine revelation ! 

Reason, we acknowiedge, is the gift of God to man;^ 
and had it always been employed, as it ought to have been, 
in the service, and for the honour of the Giver, it w^ould 
have proved what it was designed to be, an able advocate 



* See Mr. Daubeny's excellent reasoning on this subject, in the firs,-, 
discourse of his work above ixientioned. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated,. 67 

ibr the truth of revealed religion ; which, it is evident from 
that common mark of distinction, could not have been 
known, till it was revealed or discovered by its gracious 
Author.* — Yet human reason would be muttering against 
this divine truth, and holding up some semblance of reli- 
gion as natural to man, which, therefore, it was not requi- 
site for God to reveal ; the discovery of which we shall 
allow to be a natural enough consequence of the pride and 
vanity of the human heart.; — ^But the misfortune is, that 
this specious theory happens to be directly contrary to mat- 
ter of fact : For if there be any truth in revelation, which 
those who talk so much of the connection betweei) natural 
and revealed religion seem to acknowledge ; nothing is 
more certain than that God spake, or revealed his will to 
Adam in Paradise, and that too, as soon as he was created; 
a circumstance which cuts off all right of precedence in any 
other mode of discovery, and leaves no room for that ima- 
ginary system of human invention— -the religion of nature. 
Yet no sooner had revelation thus commenced in Paradise, 
than we are immediately informed of that ambitious desire 
t)f obtaining knowledge by other means, which proved so 
fatal to our first parents. " Ye shall be as Gods, knowing 
good and evil," was the temptation which took hold of 
the human understanding upon its first perversion ; and the 
success which the tempter gained on that occasion, has en- 
couraged him to go on with a continued repetition of that 
same confident assurance ; which, by setting up the reason 
of man in opposition to the word of his Maker, laid the 
foundation for infidelity, in all that variety of forms in 
which it has since appeared, through the several ages and 
nations of the world. 

The whole train of opinions that attend what is corn- 



ed 



* It has been well observed, that r't^ht reason, as expressed in Latin 
by Ratio recta, must mean reason ruled, or directed by a law, that is, 
by the law pr will of God. 



68 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 

monly called Freethinking, will be found to flow from 
some unworthy notion, or settled contempt of divine 
revelation, grounded on this false principle, that man's own 
understanding must be a sufficient guide to him in all 
matters of religious concern. — According to this assump- 
tion of the Freethinkers, as the human mind is capable of 
advancing by progressive information, to higher degrees of 
knowledge, there is nothing to prevent our carrying on the 
improvement of religion bj'- the same means, till it be 
brought to its utmost degree of perfection. This is placing 
religion on the same footing with those arts and sciences, 
the study of which opens a wide field for speculation, and 
is daily leading to new discoveries, calculated to improve 
the condition of man in this world, and produced by the 
exertion of those natural faculties with which God was 
pleased to furnish him. But religion has a different object 
in view, and points the attention of man to matters of in- 
finitely greater importance. It invites him to look forward 
to a future state of existence, and provides the means by 
which he may be prepared for the enjoyment of ever- 
lasting happiness. The knowledge and application of these 
means, accompanied with a firm belief of the end to which 
they lead, make up the great business of religion ; which, 
it is evident, man v/as w^hoUy unable to carry on by him- 
self, without immediate instruction and assistance from his 
Maker. — ^This necessary aid was afforded, as soon as he 
was created ; and has been continued in various ways, as 
circumstances required, but with a constant attention to 
the accomplishment of that gracious object which the Deity 
had in view, by communicating the knowledge of his will 
to man. Every such communication tended more and 
more to comfirm his dependance on God's everlasting pur- 
pose ; and that scheme of mercy, which had been projected 
in the councils of heaven, and partially revealed from time 
to time, was thus seen advancing through all its successive 
stages, till it arrived at that fulness of time, which had 



Primitive Truth ond Order vindicated, 69 

been appointed for its complete manifestation in the per- 
sonal ministry of God's incarnate Son. 

Such has been the uniform purpose, and continued 
progress of divine revelation, from its commencement in 
Paradise, to its final termination in the gospel of Christ. 
Nothing then can be more certain than this obvious conse- 
quence, that religion thus coming from God, and founded 
on the clear revelation of his will to man, must be consi- 
dered in itself as a perfect institution, and incapable of 
receiving any improvement from the utmost efforts of 
human intellect. Men may talk as they please, of the pro- 
gress of arts and sciences ; these, as human inventions, 
will always be susceptible of some degree cf improvement^ 
in proportion to the weakness, and want of skill displayed 
by their several authors : But nothing can be more absurd, 
than to speak of a progressive religion; which, as the work 
of God, can never receive any additional excellence from 
the wit or contrivance of men. If it has been abused and 
pei-verted by human folly, a just regard to its original insti- 
tution requires that it should be rescued from these abuses, 
^nd brought back to its primitive standard. But every 
attempt at such necessary reformation ought to have its 
object distinctly ascertained, and be directed to the proper 
measures for obtaining the removal of those corruptions, 
which have given rise to it. Without some such direction 
to a specific point, and a well regulated adherence to fun- 
damental truths, a boundless field of speculation will be 
laid open, and one theory will follow another in such end- 
less succession, as to leave those who are thus seduced 
from the right way, in the perilous condition described by 
ihe^ apostle, " ever learning, and never able to come to the 
knowledge of the truth. "^' 

" The conceit of superior learning," says a venerable 
author, " has always had an ill effect upon Christianit}', 

* 2 Tim. iii. 7. 



70 Primitive Truth and Of c/er vindicated, 

and is frequently found in those who have no great mattcr-s 
to value themselves upon. We may be as learned as we 
can make ourselves, and yet continue good Christians ; be- 
cause true learning, and true religion, were never yet at 
variance ; but the moment we are vain of our learning, we 
begin to be in danger, and some folly or other is not far 
off."* So careful was the author of this pious observation 
to guard us against that vain pretension to learning, which 
makes some men affect to be wise in matters of religion, 
*' above what is written;" while, at the same time, he was 
equally careful to withhold every encouragement from that 
enthusiastic notion, so fondly cherished by others of a dif- 
ferent description, who imagine themselves sure of salvation^ 
for no other reason, but because they are ignorant and 
unlearned. Both these extremes must be equally avoided ; 
and there cannot be much difficulty in drawing the line 
between that proud display of learning, which looks down 
with contempt on the simplicity of the gospel, and the no 
less presumptuous ignorance, which foolishly regards all 
its inward feelings and imaginary assurance, as certain 
proofs of a saving faith, though unaccompanied with any 
true knowledge of the ground on which that faith is built. 



* And none more near at hand, than what the same author had been 
Just before describing. For *' how often," says he, " has it been urged, 
that we ought not to receive the faith, which the first fathers of tht; 
ehurch, and the succeeding fathers of the reformation, have delivered 
to us, because we are of late years so far advanced above them in know- 
ledge ? But I have never seen the connection pointed out between any 
modern improvement in science, and the new doctrines of reformers in 
theology. We are certainly much improved, for instance, in the art of 
making time-keepers, above those who lived an hundred years ago; but 
no man will say, that we thence derive any advantage for numbering 
our days more v/isely, or that we have any clearer ideas of eternity, than 
we had before. An eminent artist in this way may doubt of the Apos- 
tles* Creed; but then, there is no visible relation between his art, and 
his unbelief." See Bishop Home's Charge to the Clergy of the Diocese 
of Norwich, 1792. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 71 

Being thus convinced, that there is no necessary connec- 
tion between the doctrines of Christianity, and the disco- 
veries which from time to time have been made in various 
branches of science, and therefore no wisdom or safety in 
attempting to place subjects under the same point of view, 
which are as widely separated from each other, as earth 
from heaven ; we cannot but readily embrace this unavoid- 
able consequence, and cherish it as a most valuable and im- 
portant truth, that the religion of Christ is not a thing to be 
new-modelled and improved, in hopes of bringing it to a 
greater degree of perfection. It cannot put on those va- 
rious modes and shapes, -which are suited to the fashions 
and fancies of the times, but must always be expected to 
appear in an uniform dress, and to wear the character of 
its divine Author, that of being " the same yesterday, to- 
day, and for ever." Because his apostles, and their suc- 
cessors, have been called ministers of the New Testament, 
we are not to suppose that their ministry consists in always 
delivering something that is new^ or different from what 
has been said before; since the faith for which we are 
exhorted ^' earnestly to contend, was but once delivered to 
the saints," and therefore what was the whole faith then, 
must continue to be so still ; nothing must be added to it, 
or taken from it. Perhaps there never was a time which 
required so much steady attention to this matter as the 
present; when an itch for novelty seems to prevail, beyond 
any thing of the kind that has been hitherto observed. 
Every age, no doubt, has had that common failing of ima- 
gining itself to be wiser than any that preceded it. But 
the wisdom of this age pretends to carry the point much 
farther than ever was attempted before ; and nothing more 
is necessary now to set aside the most venerable truths, and 
institutions of religion, than merly to say, that they are old 
and obsolete, and founded on such antiquated notions, as 
are totally inconsistent with that more just and liberal view 
of things, which is the pride of this enlightened age. Thus 



72 Pnmithe Truth and Ordef vindicated^ 

are mankind led away by the mere force of fashion, and 
bullied out of their religion, out of every thing that is va^ 
luable and good, by a few bold unmeaning words, which 
serve only to show the folly and confidence of those that 
use them. Such persons, we may observe, are ever on 
the wing of speculation, devising new theories both of sa- 
cred and civil government ; and when any disagreeable 
truth stands in their way, they have only to hold it up, as 
an exploded doctrine, — a remnant of that hateful thing cal- 
led Priestcraft ; which immediately does the business, and 
saves the trouble of any farther reasoning on the subject. 

These are the errors and delusions with which all sound 
and sincere Christians have to contend, and to carry on the 
contest in that earnest manner, which an Apostle so warmly 
recommends ;^ a contest, which it was never more neces- 
sary than at present, to urge with fervour, and prosecute 
with zeal and firmness — a zeal proportionate to the danger 
to which the true faith of Christ is now exposed, both from 
the bold attempts of avowed enemies, and the insidious aid 
of pretended friends, appearing outwardly to support, but 
secretly undermining the foundation of that authority, on 
which rests our belief of the Christian doctrine. In defence 
of that doctrine, the credibility of which is so openly at- 
tacked by infidelity on the one hand, and its purity no less 
endangered by enthusiasm on the other, we must there- 
fore strive to arm ourselves with such weapons as are best 
calculated for repelling the assault made on it, and the in- 
jury done to it, by each of these powerful, but, we trust, 
not invincible adversaries. From the manner in which the^ 
apostle exhorts us to pursue this arduous contest, it is evi- 
dent, that by thejaith once for all delivered to the saints, we 
are to understand, not an inward conviction of the truth of 
the Christian doctrine, or that assurance of faith, which 
some modem preachers boast of, as the peculiar privilege 

* St. Judc; 5.. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, " 73 

of their saints, but something that could be delivered in ail 
outward and public manner, could be read, or heard like 
tht^^'form of sound words^^ mentioned by St. Paul, which 
Timothy was directed to ^'' hold Jast;^''^ thdLt so he might 
hand it down to the Christian church, as a model of what 
was to be professed and believed in that church, to the end 
of the world. Accordingly it is by such a summary of the 
Christian faith that the church to which we belong con^- 
tinues^ and, I trust, will continue, to profess her belief in 
the adorable Three who subsist, with equal power, ma- 
jesty and eternity, in the unity of the Godhead, and bear 
record in heaven to the merciful scheme of man's salva- 
tion. By such a concise and well-composed j^rm of sound 
words, we are taught to ascribe our creation to " the Father 
Almighty," our redemption to " his only Son Jesus Christ 
our Lord," and our sanctification to " the Holy Ghost ;" 
adding also our faith in " one holy, catholic church," that 
mystical body, of which Christ is the glorious Head, and 
in which is enjoyed " the communion of saints," blessed 
with the promise of " fori^iveness of sins" in this world, 
and of the " resurrection from the dead, and everlasting 
life" in the world to come. This is undoubtedly the faith 
which Christ established in his church, and which he 
authorized his apostles to deliver from him, as a sacred 
privilege or blessing to his people, to be received and pre- 
served as such, Yjhole and entire, till he should come again 
to give a " crown of righteousness," to all them who shall 
thus " have ^ept the faith, and love his appearing." 

For the preservation, therefore, of such a blessing, the 
sum and substance of all the good things which Christ has 
made over to his church, and in the hope of that glorious 
reward which he has promised to such fidelity, it is surely 
the interest, as much as the duty of all Christians, to con- 
tend in the most earnest manner ; and they cannot do so 

• 2 Tim. i. 13. 
10 



T4f ^ J^rimitive Truth and Order vindicated. 

iiiore effectually, than by holding out the end and object of 
their faith in the same uniform light, in which it has ever 
been represented, as the effect of that divine immutable 
counsel, which admits of no change or variation, and so 
makes the volume of revelation speak a clear, consistent 
language from beginning to end. It begins with the crea- 
tion of the world, and the formation of man j and it ends 
with the last judgment, and consummation of all things > 
and thi*ough the whole period described in the Old Testa- 
ment, we see a regular chain and series of well-connected 
events, all leading on to the incarnation of the promised 
Redeemer, and directing the attention of God's faithful 
people to that great mystery of godliness, God manifested 
in the flesh. It was to this mysterious accomplishment of 
the Divine counsel, that the law and the prophets looked 
forward ; and what was so long shadowed out in their 
typical rites, and figurative language, was at last most hap- 
pily exhibited in all its substance, under the dispensation of 
the gospel ; which is, therefore, to be considered as fulfil- 
ling the law, just as the law was predicting the gospel, and 
both are to be viewed as constituting one beautiful and con- 
sistent scheme of salvation. 

It is by adhering to this unity of design, and placing 
things in their proper form and order, that the faith of a 
Christian is built on such a firm and solid foundation, as 
inan cannot lay ; but which was graciouslv laid for him in 
the will and counsel of his God before the world began, and 
gradually manifested in all the outlines of the marvellous 
plan, according to the wisdom of its Almighty contriver. 
When things are thus traced back to their proper source, 
we can easily perceive the instructive design of those sa- 
cred emblems, under which the knowledge of God's mer- 
ciful purpose, and good will towards men, is so beautifully 
conveyed to us : And it is in this view that we are taught 
to behold the ancient patriarchs, prophets, priests and kings, 
as typical characters, and their several offices, and the mor^ 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated^ * T$ 

re*narkable passages of their lives, as fore-showing him, 
who was to arise, as the Head of the holy family, the great 
Prophet, the true Priest, the everlasting King.* Thus the 
events which happened to the ancient people of God, wer^ 
designed to point out, as in a figure, parallel occurrences-, 
which should afterwards take place in the accomplishment 
of man's redemption, and the rise and progress of the 
Christian church : and as we are to view in the same light 
the various provocations and punishments, captivities and 
restorations of the tribes of Israel, which we are assured 
^' happened unto them for ensaraples," " types or figures^- 
and were written for our admonition ; so we are to under- 
stand in the same figurative sense, what is said of the law, 
and its ceremonies ; of the tabernacle and temple, with the 
services therein performed, and of the whole economy of 
the priesthood of Aaron. AH this the well-instructed 
Christian will easily transfer to the new law of the gospel, 
to the oblation of Christ, to the true tabernacle or temple 
not made with hands, and to what was done therein for the 
salvation of the world, by him, who was in one respect a 
sacrifice, in another a temple, and in a third a ** High Priest 
for ever after the order of Melchizedek ;" after a certain 
order, form, or regulation, which was to be the rule and 
model of the Christian priesthood for ever. 

That the Christian church was to have a priesthood, duly 
and regularly ordered, according to a form appointed for 

* See this subject admirably illustrated In the preface to Bishop Horne'3 
excellent Commentary on the Book of Psalms, which his biographer justly 
calls the greatest work of his life, and of which the author himself gave 
this account, soon after it was begun : '* The work delights me greatly, 
and seems, so far as I can judge of my own turn and talents, to suit me 
the best of any I can think of. May he who hath the Key of David, 
prosper it in my hand, granting me the knowledge and utterance neces- 
sary to make it serviceable to the church !" Let any person of judgment 
peruse the work, and he will see how well the author has succeeded, and 
kept up the spirit of it to the end. 



76 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 

that purpose, is abundantly evident from the whole of St» 
Paul's reasoning on this subject, in his Epistle to the He- 
brews ; in which the figurative economy of the law is repre- 
sented as brought to perfection under the gospel, and the 
service of the temple as furnishing a typical resemblance of 
that of the Christian church. If the faithful Jews were 
allowed to draw near to God, through the appointed minis- 
trations of the tabernacle ; " we have any altar," says the 
apostle, " from which they had no right to eat, while they 
still adhered to that unavailing service:" And if as Chris- 
tians, we have an altar ^ we must also have a priesthood to 
minister at the altar ; for these are correlative terms ; and 
St. Paul certainly considered them as such, when he was at 
so much pains to point out the analogy in this respect 
between the law and the gospel, and laid it down as a set- 
tled rule, that " no man ever taketh this honour" (of the 
priesthood) " unto himself," or can ever receive it, but 
from the hands of those who have power to give it, " those 
that are called of God as was Aaron." The apostle, it is 
evident, meant to show, that the Christian and Jewish 
churches were not two different dispensations, as to their 
original plan and purpose, but a continuation of the one 
chiirch of God, and one Divine economy for the salvation 
of man: And things were thus regularly ordained and uni-^ 
formly carried on, because it is of infinite importance to 
man, that he should always be able to know, if he will but 
diligently inquire, where, and with whom he is to find the 
commission, which has been faithfully handed down to those 
who are appointed to minister in holy things.^ If ever 

* See this matter, and others of similar importance, recommended t© 
the attention which they justly deserve, in a small tract, lately pub- 
lished, called a " Layraan^s Account of his Faith and Practice, as a Mem- 
ber of the Episcopal Church in Scotland," and of which the British Critic^ 
for December, 1801, says — " The principles which the author labours 
to establish, are certainly sound, his reasoning is cogent without subtlety, 
and his piety serious without moroseneas." 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 7T 

such an appointment took place, and we are well assured 
it did take place by Divine authority, it must certainly be 
continued, and carried on, to answer the end designed by 
it: And how can it possibly be continued in a right and 
regular manner, but by keeping it within the lines marked 
out for its preservation, and in the proper channel, through 
which it may pass on to future ages; just " as a river, 
whilst confined within its banks, flows on full and far in its 
destined course ; but if its mounds are broken down, and 
its waters scattered and diffused beyond their natural limits, 
it ceases to be a river, it loses its force, its beauty and use- 
fulness, and becomes unable to reach the distant ocean, to 
which its course was directed."* Such must have been 
the case with the Christian ministry, had no limitation been 
prescribed, no exclusive rights assigned to it, and no pro- 
vision made for transmitting these from the fountain-head, 
through streams of regular succession, to the end of the 
world. But as all this has been happily attended to, by the 
wisdom of our. blessed Redeemer, it follows of course, that 
this part of the gracious scheme of redemption must be 
stricdy adhered to by us ; no attempt must be made to 
" add to, or diminish from it." The means of grace, the 
channels of communication, through which the benefits of 
the gospel are conveyed to those who are called to partake 
of them, must be preserved whole and entire, without any 
breach or interruption, as the current of revelation itself; 
otherwise, the people of God may be accused now, as they 
were formerly, of *' committing two evils-?— forsaking the 
fountain of living waters, and hewing out to themselves 
cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no water."f In our 
Lord's conversation with the woman of Samaria at Jacob's 
well, the same figurative language is made use of, to show 

* See a Sermon, entitled, " A due Ordination as necessary as a due 
Call to the Gospel Priesthood." By the Rev. C. C, Church, rector of 
Gosforth, and minister of Trinity, Whitehaven. 

t Jer. ii. 13. 



78 Primitive Truth and Ordef vindicated^ 

that Christ being the only fountain of " living waters,"^ 
there is no other way of partaking of this life-giving spring, 
but by the means which he has appointed for imparting to 
us its salutary virtue ; and for preserving it pure and entire, 
liaving hewn us out a cistern, even his church upon earth, 
he is said to have given '' this treasure in earthen vessels^ 
that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not 
of us."f In conformity to which, he tells Ananias con- 
cerning the appointment of St. Paul to the m.inistry— " Go 
thy way, for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name 
before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel ;"J 
just as the same Lord had shown the necessity of his mak- 
ing a similar choice for the same purpose, when he thus 
addressed his apostles : *' Ye have not chosen me, but I 
have chosen you, and ordained you, that you should go, 
and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain.^'*^ 
But the fruit or effect of their apostolic commission could 
not have long remained^ far less could that commission 
have extended " even unto the end of the world," if it had 
not been understood and exercised by them to this effect, 
that as they themselves were chasen and sent^ so were they 
appointed to choose and send others, with the same ordinary 
powers which they had received, for carrying on the work 
of the nainistry, and the continued edifying of the body of 
Christ. 

It would be deemed a verj^ bold and desperate attempt 
to think of altering the circulation of the blood through the 
human body, and turning it into new channels: Yet even 
this hopeless undertaking could not exceed that height of 
folly and presumption, which would propose to divert the 
progress of divine grace from the channels appointed for 
conveying it through the mystical body of Christ ; or give 
it a course different from that, which the God of all grace 

* St. John iv. 10-14. I Acts ix. 15. 

t 2 Cor. iv. 7- \ St. John xv. 16. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 79 

has ordained for it. In all societies, even in those which 
have only the affairs of this world for their object, we find 
iShat certain regulations must be adopted for preserving 
peace and order, and securing to the several members the 
enjoyment of their peculiar rights and privileges, with all 
the benefits and advantages that are connected with the 
purpose for which the society has been formed, and which 
are expected to arise from it. Such is the case in all those 
bodies politic, or temporal societies, which, for the conve- 
nience of those concerned in them, are established on just 
principles, and supported by the lawful efforts of human 
industry. And such, we find, has always been the case, 
with respect to that ecclesiastical body, or spiritual society, 
instituted by divine wisdom, for the merciful purpose of 
communicating to those who are received into it, the means 
of grace here, and the hopes of glory hereafter. From 
the manner in which it embraces these two grand and im-* 
portant objects, it is evident that the economy of this spi- 
ritual society must have a two-fold application, and be 
considered as partly concerned with the outward, partly 
with the inward man. 

The human frame, we know, consists of two parts, a 
body and a soul ; and hence it is, that an inspired apostle 
draws a most beautiful allusion, representing the unity of 
the church of Christ, as being one body, animated and in- 
fluenced by one spirit. But if the church be designed to 
comprehend the whole man, and to hold out the means of 
sanctifying and saving both soul and body, and preserving 
both unto everlasting life ; to answer this gracious purpose, 
it must be so constituted as to exhibit outward and visible 
signs suited to the sensations of the body, and convey an 
inward and spiritual grace adapted to the necessities of the 
soul. — ^The institutions appointed for that purpose, are, 
therefore, very properly called Mysteries^ as exhibiting 
one thing to the outward senses, and by that sacramental 
emblem, disclosing another thing spiritually to the mind. 



$0 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 

They are the mysterious means, which God has ordained^ 
under the economy of the gospel, for communicating sal- 
vation and life to man : And for that reason, when St. Paul 
wished to point out the nature of his ministry, as " serving 
God in that gospel," and the regard which was due to his 
sacred office, he did it in these terms, — '•^ Let a man so 
account of us, as ministers of Christ, and stewards of the 
mysteries of God;"^ thereby plainly showing, that none 
but the " ministers of Christ," persons set apart for the 
service of the church in the way of his appointment, have 
a right to be considered as " stewards of the mysteries of 
God," duly authorized to dispense that spiritual food and 
nourishment, which the heavenly Householder has so gra- 
ciously provided for the support and comfort of his happy 
family. 

It was, no doubt, in allusion to this merciful provision, 
that we find our Lord asking — " Who then is that faithful 
and wise steward, whom his Lord shall make ruler over his 
household, to give them their portion of meat in due sea- 
son ?"t By the household here, we are certainly to un- 
derstand the church of Christ, which is often distinguished 
as " the household of faith — the house, or household of 
God :" And as Christ is by office, and in a peculiar man- 
ner, the Lord of this household, so the rulers of it are those 
officers who act under him, as the governors and pastors of 
his church, and who, it seems, must be made such by him, 
that is, made " ministers of Christ," — as he has directed, 
before they can become " stewards of the mysteries of 
God." This, we know, is the case in all well-regulated 
households. Those who act as stewards are appointed, 
not by the family, but by the Lord or Master of the family, 
and are accountable, not to them, but to him, for giving 
them their meat in due season. The meat which the 
church is to receive from its rulers and stewards, is the 

* 1 Cor. iv. 1. t St. Luke xii. 42. 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 81 

word of life, or the means of grace and salvation, which 
are called " God's mysteries ;" being that mystical provi- 
sion which he has laid up in store, to be regularly dealt 
out, for the spiritual health and strength of his faithful peo- 
ple. Who then can have any power to distribute his provi- 
sion but those to whom he has given authority for that pur*- 
pose ? Who can pretend to meddle with the " mysteries of 
God," or to administer the blessings of his holy and vener- 
able sacraments, without a sufficient warrant for so doing ? 
Nothing can be more evident, from the nature of the thing, 
than that they who are called God's stewards, must have 
his commission and authority for what they do, in their 
several services to his people. And St. Paul puts the 
matter beyond all doubt, when he tells us, that " God has 
actually sc^," or constituted officers, and these too of dif- 
ferent orders, in the church ;^ which we may know to be 
done by him, when we see it done in the manner prescribed 
by that Almighty King and Head of the church, who has 
all power in heaven and in earth, and from whom all eccle- 
siastical authority must be derived. Every ministry, there- 
fore, that does not lead up to him, through his apostles and 
their successors, is but a bold intrusion into the sacred of- 
fice ; an unwarrantable usurpation of those rights, which he 
made over to his appointed messengers, when " he sent 
them, even as the Father had sent him," with power to do 
as he had done, and perpetuate the ministerial order, ac- 
cording to the dispensation of the gospel, in the same man- 
ner as he had begun it. This is the only way in which it 
can be regularly carried forward, on the plan laid down by 
its gracious Founder ; and with respect to which plan, we 
may truly say, as of all the other parts of his holy religion, 
that what it was " yesterday," and is " to-day," the same 
it must continue " for ever j"— nothing must be " added to 
it, or taken from it." 

* 1 Cor. xii. 28. 
11 



32 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 

There are some, however, even of the Christian profes-^ 
sion, who do not admit the truth of this position ; and we 
are not ignorant of the arguments, such as they are, on 
which their rejection of it is founded.—" It cannot be 
proved," they say, " that any plan or form of ecclesiastical 
government was laid down in the Christian church, or that 
any command was given by Christ for that purpose. And 
even admitting, that something like Episcopacy was ap- 
pointed by the apostles," still they insist, that " such an 
appointment could only take place, in consequence of the 
particular circumstances of the church at that time, and 
without any view to its being a permanent establishment ; 
because no precise- constitution could be framed, "which 
would suit the church in its necessary accommodation to 
the different arrangements of civil policy, ol* be equall]^ 
agreeable to the various nations, which might embrace the 
Christian faith," Such reasoning as this, if supported by 
any thing like proof, might, no doubt, be acknowledged to 
have some weight, were it not also certain, that the consti- 
tution of the church,^ the authority of her ministers, and 
the validity of her sacraments, are all inseparably connected, 
as matters of the greatest importance in the Christian 
scheme of salvation, and must be esteemed as such by aU 
who have a just sense of the high origin, and inestimable 
value of the gospel of Christ. To those who consider the 
religion of our adorable Redeemer, as nothing ftiore than 
a republication of what they call the Religion of Nature, 
it must^ to be sure, appear very absurd and ridiculous, to 
be inquiring into, or disputing about, the external polity or 
government of the church ; since in their opinion the only 
thing necessary, is to find out how far the precepts of the 
gospel agree with the moral fitness of things, and are sup- 
ported by the law or feelings of nature, and the deductions 
of human reason. But surely they who regard Christianity 
as a religion of divine institution ; who believe, that its 
gracious Author came into the world to save sinners, and 



Primitive Truth and Order vindicated. 83 

-that " his name is the only name under heaVfen whereby 
they can be saved ;" that his sacraments of baptism, and 
the eucharist, are the appointed means of uniting us to him, 
and preserving us in that union, and derive all their efficacy 
and importance from his blessing and sanctification of them : 
Such persons cannot possibly think it a matter of indiffer- 
ence, whether the hand from which they receive these 
sacraments, be the hand of an administrator, who derives 
his authority from Christ, and is empowered to bless in his 
name, or the hand of one who has nothing of that kind but 
what he has taken to himself, or received from those, who 
had as little power as he, to grant any such call or com- 
mission. 

But to consider the validity of the Christian sacraments, 
and the authority of those who administer them, as mat- 
ters of such high importance, we have been told by a late 
popular writer,* " is placing the essence of religion, not in 
any thing interior and spiritual, not in what Christ and his 
apostles placed it, something personal in regard to the 
disciple, and what is emphatically styled in scripture, the 
hidden man of the heart ; but in an exterior circumstance, 
a circumstance which, in regard to him, is merely acciden- 
tal, a circumstance of which it may be impossible for him 
to be apprized." And so, we may say, may " his belief 
and obedience of the gospel," be merely accidental, and 
depending on the circumstance of his being bom and edu- 
cated in a Christian country, yet not the less acceptable to 
God, or beneficial to himself, on that account. But the 
author of the work to which I am now alluding, calls it 
■ ' an absurdity to make the truth of God's promises de? 
pend on circumstantials ;" and to him " nothing is more 
evident, than that the essence of Christianity, abstractedly 
considered, consists in the system of doctrines and duties 

• See Lectures on Ecclesiastical History , by George Campbell, D. D^ 
Principal of Marischai CoUegje, Aberdeen, yol, i. p. 86, Stc. 



84 Primitive Truth and Orc^ef vindicated* 

revealed by our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the essence 
of the Christian character consists in the belief of the on«f, 
and the obedience of the other." Although we acknow- 
ledge, in general, the truth of this observation, we cannot sec 
much propriety, or any advantage arising to religion, in thus 
splitting it into essentials and circumstantials, for the sake 
of weighing the one against the other ; because there is 
nnich danger of not making a proper division : and so by 
mistaking the nature of what is essential, and what circum- 
Hantial, we may throw into the one scale what should be 
placed in the other, and thereby make a separation of what 
God has been pleased to join together for our comfort and 
instruction. It was, therefore, well observed by a learned 
and ingenious author,* that " as it is one of the peculiar 
weaknesses of human nature, when, upon a comparison of 
two things, one is found to be of greater importance than 
the other, to consider this other as of scarce any importance 
at all ; it is highly necessary, that we remind ourselves, 
how gi*eat presumption it is, to make light of any institu-* 
tions of divine appointmeut ; that our obligations to obey 
ail God's commands whatever are absolute and indispen- 
sable ; and that commands merely positive, admitted to be 
from him, lay us under a moral obligation to obey him— 
an obligation moral in the strictest and most proper sense." 
Hence it would appear, that there is not so much ground 
as is generally imagined for the common distinction of 
moral SLXid positive duties; which, being both alike founded 
in the will and revelation of God, must be equally binding 
on man, and can admit of no other variety of obligation on 
our part, than what is determined by our Lord's own deci- 
sion of this matter — " These ought ye to have done, and 



* Bishop Butler, in his Analogy, Sic, p. 195, of the fifth edition — a 
work which contains much elaborate reasoning in favour of revelation, 
yet surely ascribes by far too much consequence to its pretended rival, the 
light or religion of rMttne. 



JPrimithe Truth and Order vindicated, Sj 

not to leave the other undone."^ If we see sufficient rea- 
son to embrace the religion of Christ, as the only ground 
on which we can hope for salvation and happiness, we 
must also be convinced, that, in order to promote that im- 
portant end, it must be received whole and entire ; as a 
combined " system of doctrines and duties," requiring 
our " belief of the one, and obedience of the other," with- 
out any other reference to our judgment and discretion, 
than what is necessary for our discovering, that these 
" doctrines and duties were revealed by our Lord Jesus 
Christ," either immediately while he sojourned on earth, 
or after his ascension into heaven, by means of the Holy 
Spirit, who was " to guide his apostles into all truth." 

So far then we are agreed with the learned Lecturer on 
Ecclesiastical History^ whose words I have now quoted, 
though we shall afterwards have frequent occasion to differ 
from him. In his subsequent description of what he deemed 
to be the " essence of Christianity," we think, he ought to 
have mentioned, what he could not but know, that a part of 
the " system of duties," revealed by the Holy Spirit to our 
Lord's apostles, and expressly enjoined by one of them, 
was obedience and submission to those who have a right to. 
*' guide or rule over us, and to watch for our souls i"! AncJ 
as it is impossible that such a right as this can be possessed 
by any man, or order of men, who have not derived it from 
the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls, in the way that he 
appointed for the transmission of it, we cannot but consider 
it as a matter of the highest importance to ascertain, as fdr 
as we are able, in what form of church government this 
right was originally invested, because to that government 
alone can such obedience and submission be due. 

On this point, our Ecclesiastical Lecturer is obliged to 
allow—-" that a certain external model of government must 
have been originally adopted for the more effectual preser* 

* St. Mat. xxlii. 23, f Heb. xiii. \7. 



86 Primitive Truth and Order vindicated, 

vation of the evangelical institution in its native purity, and 
for the careful transmission of it to after ages."^ And 
when there were such strong reasons for the original adop- 
tion of a " certain external model of government," it may 
well be presumed, that the apostles, supposing them to 
have been only possessed of common judgment, without 
the benefit of inspiration, could not fail, as governors of the 
church, to take the most effectual steps for the future esta- 
blishment of what was so necessary to be adopted. Nay, 
so much was even Dr. Campbell convinced of the necessity 
of such an apostolic institution of government, that he pro- 
nounces " any presumptuous encroachment on what is 
evidently so instituted, to be justly reprehensible in those 
who are properly chargeable with such encroachment, as 
is indeed any violation of order, and more especially when 
the violation tends to wound charity, and to promote divi- 
sion and strife." Happy had it been for the church in this 
kingdom, if what is here observed had been duly attended 
to by those from whom the author of this just remark 
derived his ministry.— -Yet, as if afraid that he had gone 
too far in censuring euch presumptuous encroachment a^ 
justly reprehensible, he immediately adds — ^* But the rcr 
prehension can affect those only who are conscious of the 
guilt ; for the fault of another will never frustrate to me 
the divine promise given by the Messiah, the great Inter-, 
preter of the Father, the faithful and true Witness to all 
indiscriminately, without any limitation, that he who re- 
ceiveth his testimony hath everlasting life." 

There is a sense, in which part of this reasoning may^ 
be received as well-founded ; but we cannot so easity per- 
ceive the connection, by which the following conclusion is 
drawn from it. "" I may be deceived," says the author, 
*' in regard to the pretensions of a minister, who may be 
the usurper of a character to which he has no right. I ai?\ 

* Vol. i. p. 8r, 



'Primitiiie Truth and Order vindicated, gf 

no antiquary, and may not have either the knowledge, or 
the capacity necessary for tracing the faint outUnes of an- 
cient establishments, and forms of government, for enter- 
ing into dark and critical questions about the import of 
names and titles, or for examining the authenticity of end- 
less genealogies ; but I may have all the evidence that con- 
sciousness can give, that I thankfully receive the testiniony 
©f Christ, whom I believe, and love, and serve*"* 

But surely this all-sufficient consciousness must arise 
from some source or other : and where there is a want of 
the " knowledge or capacity necessary" for such inquiries 
as are here alluded to, there must be an implicit reliance 
on the skill and fidelity of those teachers or spiritual guides, 
who ought to serve as " eyes to the blind, and feet to the 
lame," who seem to be particularly pointed out for that 
purpose in the authoritative direction delivered to God's 
people in these words—" Thus saith the Lord, stand ye 
in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is 
the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for 
your souls.""!" There were many, no doubt, in the days of 
Jeremiah, who might have availed themselves of this plea, 
that " they were no antiquaries, and had neither the know- 
kdge nor capacity that was necessary" for such laborious 
and useless investigation. Yet the comnmand is general, 
and sufficient instruction given how to proceed in discharg- 
ing the duty enjoined. There is a " good way" pointed 
out for walking in, among the " old paths," which are to be 
found out by " asking," with earnestness and circumspec- 
tion. — " Stand ye in the ways, and see^ and ask for the old 
paths." — " Asking" implies some person or thing, of whom 
inquiry may be made ; as where the children of Israel were 
commanded to " ask their fathers," and to " ask of the days 
that were past," for such information as was necessary for 
directing their conduct. The same instructive information 

• Vol. i. p. 88. t Jer. vi. 16. 



88 Pnmitive Truth and Order vindicated* 

may still be obtained, if we are at due pains to apply for it, 
and do not trust too much to that inward '' consciousness," 
which oiften promises rest to the soul, without the trouble 
of any outward inquiry about " coming" to that Saviour, 
in the way and manner which he has prescribed, who alone 
can bestow this inestimable blessing, and " give rest to the 
soul that is weary and heavy laden."^ 

Having, therefore, already considered his holy religion, 
the only way in which we can " come to him" for spiritual 
rest and comfort, as, like himself-—" the same yesterday, 
to-day, and for ever ;" and being, I hope, well convinced, 
that it ought to be received and embraced, just as it is re- 
presented and held out in the scriptures of truth, without 
" adding thereto, or diminishing from it," we shall now 
; proceed, in consequence of what has been said, to establish 
another no less evident and important fact, M=^hich shall be 
ihe subject of the following chapter. 

* St. Matt. xi. 29. 



CHAPTER ir. 

The Church of Christy in which his Religion is received and 
embraced^ is (hat spiritiml Society^ in which the Ministra* 
tion of holy Things is committed to the three distinct Orders 
0f BishopSy Priests and Deacons^ deriving their Authority 
from the Apostles^ as those Apostles received their Commis- 
sion from Christ, 

W HEN the converted Hebrews received this command 
from an inspired apostle — " Obey them that have the rule 
over you, and submit yourselves ; for they watch for your 
souls ;"^ they were thereby put in mind, not only that they 
had souls to be " watched for,^' but also that the power or 
authority, which these xvatching rulers had over them, was 
of a spiritual nature, and such as had relation to that spiri* 
tuai life, which, after being begun on earth, was intended to 
last for ever in heaven.-^This single observation presents 
tis with a just view of the difference between these two 
sorts of government, which have the things of earth, and 
the things of heaven for their several objects : A distinc- 
tion which St. Paul, in another place, seems to point out aS 
worthy of our notice, when he tells us, " the first man is of 
the earth, earthy ; the second man is the Lord from hea* 
ven."f Our earthy man must, therefore, be ruled and 
directed by such means and instruments, that is, by such 
fbrriis or modes of government, as are suited to the various 
sjituations of things on this earth ; where we are placed fot 
a while, as in a school of instruction, to fit and prepare uH 
for a more pure and permanent state in that heaven, from 
which came the second man, the Lord,-r— the -Almighty 

* Ileb, xiil. 17. t I Cor. xv 47. 

12 



90 General Defence of Episcopacy. \ 

llestorer of our nature, to establish a government suited to 
the gracious design of his coming, and most admirably cal- 
culated to qualify and dispose his happy subjects for the 
possession of that unfading inheritance reserved for them 
in " his everlasting kingdom." 

Looking forward, with prophetic eye, to the establish- 
inent of this spiritual kingdom, and to the solemn inaugu- 
ration of its heavenly King, the inspired Psalmist might 
justly say of it ; " This is the Lord's doing, and it is mar- 
vellous in our eyes."* The setting up a pure and spiritual 
kingdom in the midst of a carnal and wicked world, and in 
spite of all the opposition which the prince of this world 
could make to it ; the founding this spiritual building on a 
rock, " against which the gates of hell should not prevail," 
was surely an astonishing exertion of divine power, and 
such as evidently showed the hand of that Almighty Lord, 
who can do what he pleaseth both in heaven and in earth, 
f The " doings" of men are sometimes a little " marvel- 
lous in our eyes," when we see them not only pulling down 
and destroying those venerable fabrics of civil government^ 
which have stood for ages,— -the pride of human policy,-— 
but even attempting to subvert the foundation of that eccle- 
siastical system, which, resting on the solid ground of 
divine institution, is not to be altered or new-modelled, as 
the work of human device, or in conformity to the manners, 
the prejudices, or civil constitutions of the different nations, 
in which the Christian church has obtained a setdement. 
Here we cannot but observe a remarkable difference be- 
tween the " doing of the Lord," and that of man, with 
regard to the nature of their respective works. — What the 
former does, is done at once, and produced in full per- 
fection, according to the nature of the work, and the design 
which God has in view by producing it. It has therefore 
been justly observed, that '^ God never made his works for 

* Psalm cxviii. 23. 



General Defence of Episcopacy » 91 

man to mend ;" nor does it become a poor, dependent, fal- 
lible creature, to interfere with, or pretend to alter, the 
appointments of the supreme, all-wise and good Creator, 
It is enough for man to reform and improve himself, to 
amend what is amiss in his own conduct, and correct those 
errors and mistakes, which experience will discover in the 
best and wisest plans of government that have ever been 
devised by human ingenuity. These, it seems, can only 
be brought to their admired perfection by slow and leisurely 
degrees. Even the boasted constitution of this country, 
which has been so often proposed as a pattern to the neigh- 
bouring nations, is well known to have been the gradual 
work of ages, the happy consequence of that progressive 
spirit of improvement, which can never be so properly 
exercised, as in contriving means to supply the defects of 
human foresight, and to secure to society the benefits 
arising from the accumulated experience of successive 
generations. 

All this is very proper and necessary to be attended to, 
as far as we are concerned with the works and inventions 
of men, and obliged to show a due regard to the various 
schemes of human policy, which have been contrived, and 
established, for thus securing, as far as may be, the peace 
and good government of this world. But the temporal 
peace and prosperity of such a vain and transitory world, 
cannot surely be the only, nor the principal object, which 
man has to regard and attend to, considered as a candidate 
for eternal happiness in the kingdom of heaven. Viewing 
himself in this light, he cannot but see the necessity of cul- 
tivating a proper acquaintance with the laws and government 
of that kingdom, and of submitting to that course of pro- 
bation and discipline which has been appointed for the 
church of Christ, while militant here on earth, to prepare 
it for that triumphant state, which it is at last to enjoy with 
its glorious Head in heaven.— 'When the pious well-dis- 
posed Christian sets himself to acquire a proper knowledge 



9Z General DtfeiKe of Eplscopcu:y* 

of his duty in this respect j what a happy circumstance v& it 
^r him, that the nature and constitution of Christ's king- 
dom, as settied by himself, were fully declared, and made 
l^nown to his apostles ; those select officers, to whom the 
original commission was given, " to convert the nations, 
and teach them to observe all things whatsoever he had 
commanded them ?" On this subject every necessary infor- 
mation may be derived from the doctrine and practice of 
these aposdes, as handed down in the inspired writings of 
the New Testament, and explained and illustrated by the 
concurring testimony of the first and purest ages of the 
gospel; all which exhibit in the clearest light the foundation 
of the Christian church, the form of government esta- 
blished in it, and the manner in which it is to be supported 
by its Divine Founder, to the end of the world. 

Our knowledge of all these circumstances points out the 
peculiar nature of that spiritual kingdom erected by Christ, 
and shows how widely it differs, even in its first erection, 
from the kingdoms of this world. Their constitutions and 
forms of government are perpetually changing. What: one 
nation adopts, another rejects: What is admired in this 
age, perhaps will be reprobated in the next ; because the 
mind of man is not capable of fixing to itself any certain 
standard for adjusting the merits of those numberless po- 
litical theories, which are daily getting abroad into the 
world. But what was beyond the compass of human ability, 
has been accomplished by divine power and authority. 
The church or kingdom of God, as we have already ob- 
served, with respect to his holy religion in general, came, 
good and perfect from his hands, and might well suffer, 
but could never be improved by the inventions of men* 
In tracing it to its purest source, the fountains of antiquity 
must be resorted to, otherwise we shall see but darkly into 
the troubled waters of latter times, which faction and party 
have been continually stirring, and thereby producing end- 
less disorder and confusion. Such must always be the 



Oenfral Defence of Episcopacy. 93 

<?ase, when men attempt to form a religion, and a church 
for themselves, and are not satisfied with what God has 
provided for them. 

We must, therefore, endeavour to make ourselves suf- 
ficiently acquainted with what the goodness of God in this 
respect has done for the children of men ; and with the book 
of revelation in our hands, we shall be at no loss to disco- 
ver how well the one part of the sacred volume agrees with 
the other, and both point to the same object under every 
dispensation ; still representing the church or people of 
God as one body, actuated by one spirit, and established 
in one and the same faith and hope. Thus looking back, 
with a well-directed eye, to the state of the church, through 
its several progressive stages, from its first establishment 
in Paradise, and its confinement afterwards to one single 
family in the ark, we can trace its enlargement in the pos- 
terity of the chosen father of the faithful race, its wander- 
ing state in the wilderness, its settlement in the promised 
land, and all that happened to it, till the fulness of time 
came for the manifestation of its God and Redeemer, 
who was to put his finishing hand to the constitution of this 
spiritual society, and place it on a sure and immoveable 
foundation. Through the whole of this extended view, 
one striking circumstance must constantly arrest our atten- 
tion ; that under every dispensation of divine grace, some 
particular persons were set apart for performing the sacred 
yites of religion, and clothed with suitable authority for that 
purpose. The inspired history says but little of what is called 
the patriarchal economy. But even in the concise account 
which is given of that period, we see evident marks of the 
divine institution of sacrifice, as the most essential part of 
religious worship, and may thence justly infer that a priest-^ 
hood also was instituted to minister in holy things ; since 
there was the same reason for setting apart certain persons 
to represent Christ the Priest^ as there was for constituting 
certain offerings to represent Christ the Sacrifice, For 



94 General Defence of Eplscopactfi 

maintaining this consistenc) ,, we have every reason to be- 
lieve, that the right to minister was given to the first-born, 
as types of Him, who was to be " the First-bom among 
many brethren ;" and it was on account of Esau's despising 
and selling this right, that he was denominated " a profane 
person ;"^ one who had no just sense of God's appointment, 
or the regard which was due to sacred things ; for which 
reason he was set aside from the office, and the honour of 
the priesthood was transferred to his brother Jacob. 

When we come down to the establishment of the church 
under the Mosaic dispensation, we perceive its form and 
ministry, its authority and independence, displayed in the 
clearest manner : and these things are frequently referred 
to in the writings of the New Testament, which point to 
the ancient constitution as still to be maintained in all things 
essential to the being of a church. Thus viewing the di^ 
vine conduct in the light which revelation throws upon it, 
we are taught to consider the Jewish dispensation as the 
infancy of the Christian, and the Christian, as the full 
growth, and mature perfection of the Jewish. But in both, 
the body is formed after the same model j and we can trace 
a similarity of features and lineaments, such as is observed 
in the progressive advancement of our own bodies from 
infancy to manhood. To be sure, '' as the economy of 
man's salvation forms one complete whole, it may well be 
supposed, that there will be an uniformity in its several 
parts ;"t And when we find the God of Abraham, Isaac, 
and Jacob, regulating the service of the Israelitish church, 
by the express appointment of those who were to minister 
in it, we max/ justlv infer, that the same God, when mani-^ 
fested in the flesh for its salvation, would adopt a similar 
plan in the Christian church; thereby showing, that the 



* Heb. xii. 16. 

t See this argument well handled in Mr. Daubeny's excellent Guide to 
tie Cburcb, p. 25, &c. 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 95 

*' law being a shadow of good things to come," bore a re- 
semblance in all respects to the substance, which xhe gospel 
exhibited. The law was adorned with a priesthood of 
God's own institution — a high priest, and priests of his 
own calling-— a whole tribe of Levites of his own select- 
ing, separated from the rest of the people, and peculiarly 
set apart for the service of the tabernacle ; which, with all 
its holy things, was a type or figure of the body, and con- 
sequently of the church of Christ. In this church, there- 
fore, " which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all 
in all," we may expect to find the full completion of all 
that was prefigured under the Mosaic economy; and as the 
Hebrew ministry was " an ordinance for ever," that is, for 
the continuance of the temple and nation of the Hebrews, 
so are the divine institution, and perpetuity of the Christian 
ministry, expressed in that commission, which our Lord 
gave his apostles; — ^' As my Father sent me, even so send 
I you: and— -lo, I am with you always, even unto the end 
of the world." 

If we inquire into the history of these aposdes, before 
they received this final and most ample commission from 
their Lord and Master, -we shall find, that when the num- 
ber of his followers had considerably increased, and he was 
" moved with compassion at seeing the multitudes scattered 
abroad, as sheep having no shepherd," he thought proper 
to " ordain twelve," as the evangelist tells us, " that they 
should be with him, and that he might send them forth to 
preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast 
out devils ;" and these he named apostles^ as being persons 
peculiarly sent with power to act in his name, and to carry 
on the blessed work, which he had so happily begun. Af- 
terwards, when the harvest became too great for so few 
labourers as these twelve, our Lord was pleased to " ap- 
point other seventy also," who, though of an order inferior 
to the apostles^ as appears from their never being distin- 
guished by that title, were yet empowered to preach the 



sis General JDefence of EphcopacyZ 

gospel, and to work miracles for the confirmation of theif 
doctrine. Thus early do we observe a subordination 
among the ministers of Christ, and a striking similitude 
between the Jewish church and the Christian, with respect 
to their foundation and establishment. The former was 
delivered from the Egyptian slavery by Moses the servant 
of God ; and the latter is delivered from its bondage to sitt' 
and satan, a slavery infinitely more deplorable, by Jesus 
Christ the Son of God. In the former, the twelve tribes were 
conducted by twelve officers, the heads of their several tribes, 
who were all subject to Moses: and in the latter, twelve 
apostles were appointed to guide and instruct the people, 
and themselves to be obedient in every thing unto Christ. 
And, to complete the allusion, our Lord's seventy disciples 
answered to the same number of the heads of families, who 
were appointed according to the number of Jacob's family 
that went down with him into Egypt,* and also according 
to the number of the " seventy men of the elders of Israel," 
who were solemnly set apart for assisting Moses in " bear-* 
ing the burden of the people."']' Thus, as some of the old 
fathers observed, our Lord first chose twelve apostles, and 
afterwards he added other seventy select disciples, that by 
this means, the people discovering the resemblance betweeit 
him and Moses, might the more readily believe him to be 
that Prophet, who, Moses foretold, should come. 

Thus far did our Saviour collect and gather his church iit 
his own person, and while his ministry was confined to 
" the lost sheep of the house of Israel ;" on which account 
St. Paul calls him a '^ minister of the circumcision," and 
he was frequently styled — " the King of the Jews." But 
as his death was to take away the distinction between Jev/ 
and C:ientile, so after his resurrection he declared, that 
" all pov/er was given to him in heaven and in earth ;" as a 



* See Dr. Potter on Church Government, p. 49—50. 
t Num. xi. 16, \7. 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 97 

proof of which, he enlarged the power of his apostles, and 
gave them a full and absolute commission, to convert, bap- 
tize and teach, not the Jews only, but " all nations." The 
nature of their commission is sufficiently expressed by our 
Lord's telling them — '' As my Father hath sent me, even 
so send I you ;" which plainly showed, that as the Father 
had sent and empowered him to collect, constitute and 
govern his church, and ordain ministers in it, so he devolved 
this mission and power upon them ; and as before they had 
been only his personal attendants, waiting his orders from 
his own mouth, they were now to stand in his stead, to be 
officers in ti^ust for the regular administration of the affairs 
of his kingdom, and to have authority to send others, for, 
the purpose of carrying on and perpetuating the same plan 
which he had set on foot, even unto the end of the world, 
Though they were thus sent by him, even as he had been 
sent by the Father, yet it is certain, they, could not be sent 
as mediators and redeemers, as he was ; for there is but 
".one Mediator between. God and. men, the man Christ 
Jesus." This new commission, therefore, must be under- 
stood only of the authority of government and discipline 
in the church, which Christ himself had received of the 
Father, and of ordaining others to the same office, to which 
the apostles themselves had been called by virtue of their 
ordination. While our Lord himself continued personally 
present with them, they had a commission to baptize, and 
preach the gospel, and to do such things as were most likely 
to gain credit to their doctrine. But now being sent in a 
more ample and solemn manner, to supply the place of 
their absent Master, and carry on the work which he had 
begun, they were empowered to convey to others that 
Episcopal Authority, which they themselves had received 
from the chief Shepherd and Bishop of souls ; that so 
there might be a continual, uninterrupted succession of 
ecclesiastical governors and pastors, who, in consequence of 
his gracious promise, were to hope for tlie blessing of his 



98 General Defence 6f Episcopdctj^ 

spiritual presence, protection arid assistance in the exectt* 
tion of their sacred office, even unto the end of the world. 
Thus were the apostles exalted to the highest station in 
die church, according to the account which St. Paul gives 
of this matter, when he tells us—that '' God hath set some 
in the church, first apostles."^ He set thent^r^^, not 
only in order of time, but in dignity of office, and distin- 
guished them as the governors of the church, under Christ 
its supreme Head : Which enlargement of their power we 
find them soon after exercising, by electing one to fill up 
the place of Judas, which had fallen vacant by his miserable 
end, and prescribing several rites to be observed by the 
members of their spiritual society. But though the apostles 
were thus constituted the principal labourers in God's vine- 
yard, it cannot be supposed, from the daily increase of the 
work which it required, that they could long be able to at* 
tend to all the minuter parts and branches of it. They 
therefore found it necessary, according to the model esta- 
bli^ed by their blessed Master, to continue that other in- 
ferior order of church officers, in which capacity themselves 
had served under him, while he was upon earth* These 
are often mentioned under the title oi presbyters or elders^ 
though the express time and manner of ordaining them be 
tiot parti<:ularly recorded.. Thus we are told of the apos- 
tles Paul and Barnabas, that in the course of their travels 
*' for confirming the souls of the disciples, they ordained 
them elders or presbyters in every church."f St. James 
directs the sick to " call for the elders or presbyters of the 
church to pray for them.'^ St. Peter warns those to 
whom he wrote, to be " obedient to their elders^ and he ex- 
horts these elders or presbyters to feed the flock of God 
which was among them."§ St. Paul puts Titus in mind, 
that he " had left him," as bishop, " in Crete, that he 



• 1 Cor. xii. 28. % St. James v. 14. 

t Acts xiv» 23, § 1 St. Peter v. 1—5. 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 9@ 

should set in order the things that were wanting, and or- 
dain elders in every city."* The elders^ in all these passages, 
are the same with presbyters or priests^ the second order of 
ministers in the church, whom we may suppose St. Paul to 
have had in his eye, when, after mentioning — that " God 
had set some in the church, first apostles" — he added, 
" secondarily prophets;^'* the word prophet being often ap- 
plied to signify a person acting by a divine commission, andT 
employed in God's immediate service, but without convey- 
ing the idea of his foretelling future events, which is now 
commonly affixed to the word prophets 

But we have farther to observe, from the information 
given us in the history of the apostles, that soon after they 
had received their Episcopal power, they ordained another 
order of church ministers, who, from the nature of their 
office, were peculiarly distinguished as deacons or servants. 
There were seven of these ordained at first, because the 
apostles judged such a number sufficient to supply the ne- 
cessities of the church at that time. They had the charge 
of the poor people, and took care of the charitable collec- 
tions that were made for their relief. But they had also 
authority, as they now have with their bishop's license, to 
preach the gospel, and to baptize where a higher minister 
cannot be had. Thus we find Philip, who was one of them, 
baptizing the eunuch ;f while Stephen, another of them, suf- 
fered death, for preaching the gospel to his own country- 
men.J Accordingly this office was regularly continued in 
the church; and in every council or synod, mention is 
made of the deacons, their powers are confirmed, and their 
duties explained, as being the persons alluded to, whom 
the apostle says, God has set in the church, as " thirdly 
teachers.''''^ 

These seem to be all the standing orders established in 



* Titus i. 5. I Acts vi. and vii. 

t Acts viii. 38, jj 1 Cor. xii. 28. 



100 General Defence of Episcopacy i 

the church; which therefore St. Paul, we see, distinguishes, 
in a particular manner, by mentioning them in their rc'gulaf 
order — ^" first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teach- 
ers :" Which three gradations of office, thus distinguishing 
the Christian, as they had before distinguished the Jewish' 
dispensation, were carefully and constantly preserved in the 
primitive church, and spread, with the spreading of the 
gospel, to the very ends of the earth. In ever)' kingdom 
arid corner of the converted world, we find the bishops, as 
the successors of the apostles in all their ordinary powers, 
presiding over their several portions 6f the flock of Christ; 
administering the sacred rite of confirmation, as the sealer 
sanction of admission into that flock ; ordaining presbytersy 
as the pastors of its several congregations, and deacons for 
the particular services allotted to their order ; and exerci- 
sing their Episcopal authority, in governing and inspect- 
ing, each his own particular diocese, as well as in promot-' 
ing and preserving the peace, unity and order of the whole 
body of Christians. According to this plan of church 
government, so exactly similar to that which was esta- 
blished on a smaller scale, under the Levitical priesthood, 
we find St. Paul, in that solemn charge which he gave to 
Timothy^ when appointed bishop of the church in Ephe- 
sus, putting him in mind, among many other things, that 
*' he should lay hands suddenly on no man ; that he should 
receive no accusation against 2i presbyter^ but before two or 
three witnesses ; and that the deacons in his church should 
be men of sober and orderly conversation." Here we have 
a plain intimation of what was then, and afterwards to be^ 
the form of ecclesiastical administration. We see the offi- 
cers of the church distinguished by their respective sta- 
tions; the bishops as governor and inspector of a particular 
portion of it, answering to the high-priest under the law ; 
and the presbyters and deacons^ subordinate ministers in 
it, like the priests and Levites: And where we find these 
orders of ministers duly appointed, the word of God 



General Defence of Episcopacy* lai; 

|ji*eached, and his sacraments regularly administered, there 
we find the church of Christ, with its form, its authority, 
and every thing that is essential to its nature and constitu- 
tion, 

" The wisdom of God," says an admirable writer on this 
subject, "is hfere very evident, in appointing the orders 
of the Christian ministry after the pattern of the Jewish 
church, which was of his own appointment so long before. 
That there might be no uncertainty in a case of such conse- 
quence to the souls of men, there was no novelty, but a 
continuation of the like administration with that which had 
all along been known and acknowledged in the church, 
Aaron was an high-priest^ with a ministry peculiat* to him- 
self ; under him there was an order of priests^ twenty-four 
in number, who served hy course in the daily sacrifices and 
devotions of the tabernacle and temple j and these were as- 
sisted by the whole tribe of the Levites» As the law had 
its passover, its baptisms, its incense, its sacrifices, its con- 
secrations, its benedictions, all to be realized under the 
sacraments and oflFerings of the gospel, so its ministry was 
but a pattern of the ministry which is now among us ; and. 
we cannot mistake the one, if we have an eye to the 
other: such is the goodness of God in directing us, through 
all the confusions of the latter days, by a rule of such great 
antiquity, to the way of truth, and keeping us in it."* 

* See Mr. Jones' Essay on the Church, a tract most warmly recom- 
imended by two very competent judges of its merit, the late Dr. Home, 
bishop of Norwich, and Dr. Horsleyj now bishop of St. Asaph, who, 
in the charge which he delivered at his second general visitation of the 
diocese of Rochester, in the year 1800, thus addresses his clergy—" When, 
by assiduity in your public and private ministry, by the purity of your 
lives, and the soundness of your doctrine, you have gained the good will 
and esteem of your parishioners, they will be ready to give you their 
attention upon a subject, upon which the people of this country, in gene- 
ral, much want good teaching: I mean the nature of the church, the 
necessity of church communion, and the danger of schism. Upon these 
points I know nothing so well calculated for general edification, as a tract> 



102 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

God has many ways of directing us to what is right, but 
none more instructive, than the beautiful order and striking 
uniformity to be observed through all his dispensations of 
grace and mercy, and particularly in those which are con- 
nected with the care and government of his church. There 
it is that men are to look for the " old paths," the good and 
approved way of God's appointment, that they may walk 
therein, and find rest to their souls. But this can never be 
the case, if they take delight in following the endless inno- 
vations of latter times, and instead of seeking rest in God's 
way, and according to his direction, are content to wander 
about in ways of their own devising, and will never allow 
their souls to rest on the basis of true religion. New 
schemes of faith, and false systems of duty are daily re- 
commended to men's deluded fancies ; and notwithstanding 
all that has been said (and much has been written with 
great clearness of reasoning) to show, that the constitution 
of God's church must be ever considered as the instituted 
means of preserving and conveying the precious doctrines 
of salvation, from the beginning to the end of time, it is 
still pretended, that the scriptures of truth give us no infor- 
mation on this interesting subject, and prescribe no parti- 
cular form of ecclesiastical polity " as necessary, or even 
more acceptable to God than another." 

In the lectures on ecclesiastical history^ of which we have 

cntituled, An Essay on the Church, by the late Rev. William Jones, 
some time of Pluckley, in this county, bur last of Nayland, in Suffolk. 
It has lately been reprinted in a small size, and at a cheap rate, by the 
Sockty for promoting Christian Knowledge, of which the author had been 
many years a most useful member. Of that faithful servant of God, I 
can speak, both from personal knowledge, and from his writings. He 
was a man of quick penetration, of extensive learning, and the soundest 
piefy And he had, beyond any other man I ever knew, the talent of 
writing upon the deepest subjects to the plainest understandings. He is 
gone to his rest, and his works, we trust, follow him. His Catholic 
Doctrine of the Trinity, and this Essay on the Churchy cannot have too 
wide a circulation." 



General Defence of Episcopacy, . 103 

already taken some notice, it is affirmed, and " will be 
owned," says the author, " by those who, on this subject, 
are capable of examining with coolness, and pronouncing 
with impartiality, that we have not that sort of informa- 
tion in holy writ, from which we can with certainty form 
a judgment, concerning the entire model of the apostolic 
church. What we can learn thence on this subject, we 
must coUect from scattered hints given, as it were, inci- 
dentally, when nothing seemed less the intention of the 
writers, than to convey to us a particular account of the 
plan of the society they had formed."* Whether there be 
any truth in this observation, or how much regard is due 
to it, may be easily inferred from what has been, in the 
foregoing pages, very briefly stated respecting the " infor- 
mation," which may certainly be obtained from the writ- 
ings of the New Testament, " by those who are capable 
of examining with coolness." — And were there even less 
to be found than is really contained in the sacred records, 
on the subject of church government, the conclusion to be 
drawn from this seeming silence on a matter of such im- 
portance, would be very different from that which this 
theological teacher has attempted to draw from it. If such 
of the apostles as were employed in writing the gospels 
and epistles that go by their respective names, did not 
think it necessary to mention in express and positive terms, 
the plan of the society which they had formed on the mo- 
del laid down by their blessed Master, it is to be remem- 
bered, that the government of the church was then in the 
hands of the apostolic college, and the form and manner in 
which it was administered, being visible to all who had 
any concern with it, there was no more occasion for telling 
them what that form of government was, than there would 
be now, in enforcing a proper behaviour on the subjects of 
this united kingdom, to tell them, that they were governed 

* Ci-. CampbeU's Lectures, lect. iv. 



104 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

by a King, assisted in his legislative capacity by the Lords 
and Commons in parliament assembled. 

Of that which is daily exhibited in practice, there seems 
to be no necessity for a minute description in theory ; and 
as the practice of the apostles, under the immediate direc- 
tion of the Holy Spirit, was perfectly sufficient to show^ 
how the church was then governed, and in what way a 
siiccession of governors was to be continued, as their Lord 
had promised, " even unto the end of the world ;" this 
was a matter, which, however important in itself, did not 
require to be particularly insisted on, in the writings of the 
New Testament, because it must have been easily known, 
and well understood, by those persons for whose imme- 
diate use these writings were originally intended. A great 
number of these were either Jews by descent, or proselytes 
to the Jewish religion before they embraced the faith of 
Christ ; and to people of this description, the form and 
order of the priesthood had long been as familiar as the 
daily service performed in the temple ; all which, they knew, 
were to be considered as " types and shadows of the good 
things to come," under the dispensation of the gospel. 
Viewing the religion of their fathers in this light, as nothing 
else in fact but Christianity under a veil, these converted 
Jews, or Jewish proselytes, would naturally infer, from 
the little that was said on this subject, that the same orders 
of priesthood were to be retained under the gospel that 
had been established under the law ; especially when they 
saxv three orders actually employed in the work of the 
ministry, and heard of certain Christians " perishing in the 
gainsaying of Corah j" a thing which to them must have 
appeared impossible, if there was not to be still a superior 
order of priesthood in the church, the " honour of which, 
no man was to take to himself, but he that was called of 
God, as was Aaron." Even the converts from heathenism 
had been so long accustomed to higher and lower degrees, 
among those who were appointed %Q direct its i^.9!fttr9\is 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 105 

services, that when they saw the worship and discipline of 
the church conducted by the three orders of apostles^ pres' 
hytersy and deacons^ they could not fail to believe, that this 
plan of ecclesiastical polity was to be permanent under the 
gospel, as a similar establishment had been under the law 
while it remained in force, and that both were acceptable 
to that God of order from whom they proceeded.^ 

It is true. Dr. Campbell is at great pains to expose what 
he thinks the absurdity of establishing any analogy between 
the priesthood of the Old and that of the New Testament; 
the former of which being intended to serve for a time, 
he considers as " instrumental in ushering a more divine 
and rational dispensation ;"'f more divine than that, which 
God himself had instituted-— more rational than that, by 
which the reason of his own chosen people had been so 
long directed ! On this point he labours, with uncommon 
ardour, through a whole lecture, inveighing against the 
distinction between clergy and laity ^ and with parti- 
cular severity against, what he is pleased to call, " the 
priestly pride of some prelatical preachers ;"J where the 
force of the censure, no doubt, lies in the beautiful allite- 
ration or jingle of the sentence. Were we disposed to re- 
tort in something like his own style, it would not, we pre- 
sume, be difficult to show, that the pride of presbytery is 
much more predominant in these prelections^ than could 
have been expected from a professor^ whose general cha- 
racter was supposed to place him far above the use of any 
such mean, unbecoming language, as that which we have 
now quoted. We must take him, however, as he is repre- 
sented to us in this posthumous publication, which, we 
are assured, " was left fully written out by himself, and in 
a proper state of preparation for the press j" and of which 



* See this point very properly handled in the Anti-Jacobin JRevieiv of 
Dr. Campbell's Lectures — for June, 1801, 

f See his Lectures, lect, x. | Lecture x. 

J4 



106 General Defence of Episcopactf* 

it is said, in an advertisement prefixed to the work, that 
" such as are acquainted with the subject, will admire the 
author's well-digested learning, and will readily perceive 
the importance of an accurate historical deduction of the 
progress of church power, and the establishment of a hi* 
crarchy, and how clear and decisive it is, in all that may 
be termed the hinge of the controversy between high 
church and others.'^ 

From this prefatory account of these boasted lectures^ 
and from what we have heard reported of their extraor- 
dinary merit, by those who are prepared to admire and 
extol whatever has come from the pen of their author, it 
may fairly be presumed, that they are considered as con- 
taining the whole strength of the arguments against dio- 
cesan Episcopacy, and that every thing which could be 
said on the subject, has now been brought forward, " with 
that perspicuity, candour and moderation," which are said 
to distinguish the writings of Dr. Campbell* It may, there- 
fore, be deemed not a little presumptuous in any one, who 
has not arrived at the same height of literary fame, to at- 
tempt a refutation of such strong and powerful reasoning 
as might be expected from a writer whose reputation has 
been long established " in the republic of letters," The 
only apology I have to offer for such seeming presumption, 
shall be furnished by Dr. Campbell himself j who, in the 
introduction to his ingenious Dissertation on Miracles, al- 
luding to Mr. Hume^ as a " subtle and powerful adversary," 
makes this modest acknowledgment, which I shall beg 
leave to apply to my own case :— " With such an adver- 
sary," as Dr. Campbell, " I should on very unequal terms 
enter the lists, had I not the advantage of being on the side 
of truth. And an eminent advantage this doubtless is. It 
requires but moderate abilities to speak in defence of a good 
cause. A good cause demands but a distinct exposition, 
and a fair hearing ; and we may say with great propriety, 
it will speak for itself." 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 107 

To strengthen this confidence in the goodness of thj& 
cause, which now claims our support, I have the satisfaction 
to observe, that nothing has been said against it, in these 
modem, and by some so much admired lectures^ but what 
had been often said before, by writers on the same side, and 
as often answered by others of a different persuasion. Even 
Dr. Campbell, with aU his boasted penetration, and " won- 
derful acuteness," has not been able to produce any one 
objection to the apostolic, and therefore divine institution 
of Episcopacy, which had not been started by others, who 
preceded him in the same field of controversy.^ Some of 
their arguments he has indeed clothed with a new dress, 
and by that means has made them assume somewhat of a 
different form and appearance ; but in substance and reality, 
we shall find them the same as those to which we have been 
always accustomed, with the exception perhaps of one pro- 
minent and distinguishing feature, their being accompanied 
with a peculiar boldness of assertion, and peremptory mode 
of decision, which certainly give no addition to their in- 
trinsic value, or to their effect in proving the truth of what 
is thus asserted. 

Such then being the nature of the work we have to ex- 
amine, the materials of which have been furnished by other 
hands, and only put together by this eminent artist, we 
need only look back to the accounts of those, who have al- 
ready inspected them, and see what opinion was given of 
them at the time when they were first produced. Since 
even this learned and strenuous opposer of Episcopacy has 

* In proof of this, it might easily be shown, how much he has bor- 
rowed, not only from Blondel, Salmasius, and other foreigners, but also 
from writers in the English language, such as Cartviright, Clarkson^ 
Baxter, Lord King, ZMXih^ox oi ?in Encpiiry into the Constitution, k3'c. of the 
primitive Church ;^ and from his own countryman Mr. Anderson, of Dun- 
barton against Rhind, to whom he seems to have been particularly in- 
debted for some of his most violent invectives against the " High-churcb 
party," as may be seen in the dedication, preface, and many other parts 
of Mr^ Anderson*s work. 



lOS General Defence of Episcopacz/, 

been able to say nothing that is new against it, there is na 
reason to expect, that any thing new should be said in its 
defence. As the mode of attack is still the same, the 
means of repelling it must be the same likewise: And 
since our acute and ingenious adversary has not conde- 
scended to strike out any other way of assailing our eccle- 
siastical constitution, than what has been discovered by 
those that went before him with the same hostile view, we 
must be content to follow him in the beaten path, which so 
many of his predecessors have trod, though perhaps not so 
capable as he, of giving it all the turnings and windings 
which are so curiously displayed in the lectures now before 
us. 

It is proper to begin the observations, which we have 
proposed to make on these theological lectures, by giving 
the author's 0\vn account of them. " I intend," says he, 
in the beginning of his first lecture, " that the subject of 
the present and some succeeding lectures, shall be the sa- 
cred history, the first branch of the theoretic part of the 
theological course which claims the attention of the student. 
This is subdivided into two parts : the first comprehends 
the events which preceded the Christian aera ; the second, 
those which followed. The first, in a looser way of speak- 
ing, is included under the title of Jewish history ; the se- 
cond is what is commonly denominated church history, or 
ecclesiastic history." It is this second part of his plan, 
with which we are more immediately concerned, and which 
he introduces, by telling us, towards the conclusion of his 
second lecture : " Now indeed was formed a community 
of the disciples of Jesus, which was called his church ; a 
word that denotes no more than society or assembly, and is 
sometimes used in the New Testament, with evident ana- 
logy to the common use, to signify the whole community 
of Christians considered as one body, of which Christ is 
denominated the Head ; and sometimes only a particular 
congregation of Christians. In this general society, founded 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 109 

in the unity of their faith, their hope, their love, cemented, 
as it were, by a communion or joint participation, as occa- 
sion offered, in religious offices, in adoration, in baptism^ 
and in the commemoration of the sufferings of their Lord, 
preserved by a most friendly intercourse, and by frequent 
instructions, admonitions, reproofs when necessary, and 
even by the exclusion of those who had violated such 
powerful and solemn engagements; in all this, I say, there 
was nothing that interfered with the temporal powers." 
And we are ready to say the same, because Christ himself 
assures us, that " his kingdom^'* which Dr. Campbell chooses 
to call " the Christian commonwealth^ is not of this world," 
and, therefore, " in no respect calculated to interfere with 
the rights of princes, or afford matter of umbrage or jea- 
lousy to the secular powers." But when we are told, that 
*' this general society is cemented by a communion or joint 
participation in baptism^"* we are at a loss to know what 
is meant by this expression, as connected with what fol- 
lows ; since there is surely no command in scripture, en- 
joining the disciples of Jesus to partake jointly^ as occasion 
offers^ in baptism^ although they are expressly commanded 
to partake jointly in what is here called, " the commemo- 
ration of the sufferings of their Lord." We are certain, 
that baptism is the only means whereby members can be 
admitted into this society ; but we have never learned, that 
a set of unbaptized persons, even though united in the be- 
lief of the gospel, have any authority to constitute them- 
selves members of it, by baptizing one another, which 
would seem to be the Lecturer's meaning, in the passage 
which we are now considering. 

We are also obliged to differ from him very widely, with 
respect to what is called the Church; which word, if it 
denotes, as he acknowledges, a society^ must also signify, 
not a casual assembly^ or even a meeting of persons by 
voluntary agreement among themselves ; but, as the deri- 
vation of the original word implies, a select society, or 



101 General Defence of Episcopae^^ 

number of people, called or selected, by some persofi ot 
persons having authority for that purpose : And as the 
kingdom of Christ is declared to be " not of this world,'* 
the subjects of that kingdom, or the members of his church, 
must be considered as called out of or from the worlds 
called by God from " the world that lieth in wickedness," 
that " having delivered them from the power of darkness, 
he may translate them into the kingdom of his dear Son."'*^ 
All this shows the nature and jurisdiction of the church of 
Christ to be very different from that of " any private com- 
pany, like a knot of artists or philosophers," to which Dr* 
Campbell is pleased to compare the society founded by the 
Son of God for the salvation of mankind : a comparison 
so unworthy of being brought forward on such an occasion, 
and so unlikely to answer any good end, by the terms in 
which it is stated, that we should not have thought it de* 
serving the smallest notice, if it were not evidently intended 
to introduce an inquiry into the causes of that woful cor- 
ruption, which soon prevailed among Christians, and which, 
by a long and fanciful chain of connection, is traced to the 
primitive practice of referring their civil differences to the 
arbitration of their ministers. 

This practice is considered as a natural consequence of 
St. Paul's " expostulation with the Corinthians on the 
nature and dignity of their Christian vocation, to which it 
would be much more suitable, patiently to suffer injuries, 
than to endeavour to obtain redress," by going to law in the 
heathen courts. But lest there should be any mistake on 
this point, by confounding matters of civil controversy with 
injuries of a more criminal nature, our Lecturer takes care 
to inform us, that not only " such private offences, but also 
those scandals which affected the whole Christian fraternity, 
were," in the apostolic age, " judged by the churchy that is, 
the congregation,'''' '^ Accordingly," he says,! " the judg- 

* Col, J. 13. f Lecture iii. 



Qeneral Defence of Episcopacy, 111 

ment, which Paul, by the Spirit of God, had formed, con- 
cerning the incestuous person, he enjoins the church, to 
whom his epistle is directed, that is (to use his own words 
for an explanation), them who at Corinth are sanctified in 
Christ Jesus, called to be saints, to pronounce and execute. 
And in his second epistle to the same church,* he says, in 
reference to the same delinquent — ^" Sufficient to such a man 
is the censure, which was inflicted by many;" vttoIoiv vXhovuv 
-^by the community — and (\\ 10) " To whom ye forgive 
any thing, addressing himself always to the congregatioUj 
I forgive also. We admit, with the learned Dodwell,'j' 
tiiat in the censure inflicted on the incestuous person, the 
Christians at Corinth were but the executors of the doom 
awarded by the apostle. Nor does any one question the 
apostolic authority in such matters over both the flock and 
the pastors. But from the words last quoted, it is evident, 
that he acknowledges^ at the same time, the ordinary power 
in regard to discipline lodged in the congregation; and from 
the confidence he had in the discretion and integrity of the 
Corinthians, he promises his concurrence in what they shall 
think proper to do. ' To whom ye forgive any thing, I 
forgive also.' Now, though in after times the charge of 
this matter also came to be devolved, first on the bishop 
and presbyters, and afterwards solely on the bishop, yet 
that the people as well as the presbyters, as far down, at 
least, as to the middle of the third century, retained some 
share in the decision of questions, wherein morals were im- 
mediately concerned, is manifest from Cyprian! s letters still 
extant. In his time, when congregations were become 
very numerous, the inquiry and deliberation were holdeu 
(perhaps then more commodiously) in the ecclesiastical col- 
lege, called the presbytery^ consisting of the bishop, the 
presbyters, and the deacons. When this was over, the 
result of their inquiry and consultations was reported to 

*- 2 Cor. ii. 6. f De jure hlcorum sacerdotali. c. iii. sec. 16. 



1 12 General Defence of Episcopacy. 

the whole congregation belonging to that churchy who were 
called together on purpose, in order to obtain their appro- 
bation of what had been done, and their consent to the re- 
solution that had been taken ; for without their consent^ no 
judgment could regularly be put in execution." 

Such is the surprising account given of this matter in 
Dr. Campbell's Lectures ; and such the light in which his 
theological students were taught to view the original consti- 
tution and discipline of the Christian church ! — Had such 
an account been given by one of our modern independent Sy 
who boast of their congregational churches, as the only 
form of primitive institution ; or had such a lecture been 
read in \hQ society for propagating the gospel at home^ we 
should have considered it, however ill founded and erro- 
neous, as perfectly natural, and consistent with the object 
and end of these independent and missionary schemes."^ 
But how; shall we discover or allow the merit of any such 
consistency of character, where we see a man of acknow- 
ledged abilities, and holding some of the most distin- 
guished offices which the religious establishment of this 
country has to boast of, yet supporting and recommending 
a system of ecclesiastical order and discipline, almost as 
different from that which is established in Scotland, as it is 
opposite to every thing of the kind to be met with in the 
primitive church ? Have not the friends of this establish- 
ment too much reason to suspect that their learned Lecturer 
would have been one of its warmest opponents, had not his 
opposition been prevented by the liberal provision which 
it held out to him, and the preferments which he so long 
enjoyed? 

But in the preceding extract from bis third lecture^ no 

* We have heard, that Greville Eioing, and the Haldenites, hold Dr. 
Campbell's Lectures in high estimation. They have also been much ad- 
mired and recommended by the Monthly and Critical Revievjers, who, in 
general, are not considered as very friendly either to primitive truth or 
order. 



General Defence of Episcopacy. 113 

singularity of opinion strikes us more forcibly than his 
Strang' insinuation, that Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, was 
no more but the pastor of a single congregation ; when the 
keenest adversaries of the Episcopal cause have been oblig- 
ed to acknowledge that he was undoubtedly the fixed and 
permanent moderator of a presbytery^ which contained at 
least eight congregations : And though Dr. Campbell has 
asserted it, as a thing " manifest from Cyprian's Letters," 
that in his time, " the people^ as well as the presbyters, re- 
tained some share in the decision of questions, wherein 
morals were immediately concerned," yet he has not fa- 
voured us with the quotation of a single passage to prove 
the truth of his assertion ; and we are certain, that many 
passages could be produced to evince the direct contrary, 
and which would completely overthrow this pretended 
jurisdiction of the people. 

. Such, indeed, was the remarkable humility and conde- 
scension of this primitive martyr, the venerable bishop of 
Carthage, that from the time of his entering on his Epis- 
>^opal office, as he says in one of his letters — " he had resolv- 
ed to do nothing in the public affairs of the church, with- 
out the advice of his presbyters and deacons, and the con- 
sent or approbation of the people at large."* But, that this 
was the effect of his own free and voluntary condescension, 
and what he was not bound to adhere to, if he saw good 
reason for acting otherwise, is evident from many instan- 
ces of his future conduct, and particularly from the letters 
written by him, on the subject of reconciling those who, 
by sacrificing to idols, during the Decian persecution, had 
lapsed or fallen from the communion of the church. In one 
of these letters, he threatens his presbyters and deacons 
with a heavy sentence, if they should dare to transgress the 
Fule, or order, which he had sent them, respecting the treat- 

* Quando primordio Episcopatus mei statuerhn, nihil sine consilio ves- 
tro, et sine consensu plebis, mea privatim senteniia gerere. Ep, xiv, p. Ho. 

15 



114 General Defence of Episcopacy 4 

tnent of these unhappy persons in his absence.^ Let aay 
person read the letters, and try if it be possible to reconcile 
them to the character of one, who Was nothing more than 
the pastor of a single congregation, or to discover any 
thing in them that looks like an acknowledgment on the 
writer's part, of that democratic influence in the adminis- 
tration of church discipline, which Dr. Campbell seems so 
eager to support* 

But we need not wonder at his making Cyprian no more 
than the pastor of an independent congregation, who » ould 
do nothing " without their consent," when we find him 
endeavouring to press St. Paul himself into the same ser- 
vice. For though he admits, as he could not well do other- 
wise, that the Christians at Corinth were but the executors 
of the doom " awarded by the apostle ;'' yet he thinks it 
evident, that St. Paul " acknowledged the ordinary power 
tti regard to discipline lodged in the congregation," because 
he told them—' To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive 
also j' thus " promising his concurrence in what they should 
judge proper to da;" which surely implies, that without hia 
concurrence in this affair, they could do nothing ; and that 
all their power of judging arose from the authority, which, 
in this instance, and for particular reasons, he was pleased 
to give them. And so he tells them—" To this end also 
did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether 
ye be obedient in all things."t Indeed, the language which 

* *' Interea, siqnis immoderatos et praeceps, sWe de nostns presbyteris 
*el diaconis, sive de peregrinis, ausus fuerit, ante sententiam nostravi, 
communicare cum lapsis, a communicatiotie nostra resecetur." See this 
subject discussed in a most satisfactory manner, by Bisiiop Sage, in his 
Principles of the Cyprianic Age. London, 1695. 

t 2 Cor. ii. 9. It is well observed by the Anti-Jacobin Reviewef of 
this article, that ** to whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also," is cer- 
tainly the language of a superior to inferiors, who have no power eithei* 
to punish, or to forgive, but what they derive from him : It is, as if the 
king had said to the viceroy of Ireland, during the late rebellion — " I en- 
trust yoa v^ith the amplest powers for the public good : such of the rebels 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 115 

the apostle uses, through the whole of his discussion of 
this awful subject, plainly shows, that the power of excom- 
municating the obstinately guilty, or re-admitting the peni- 
tent, rested solely in himself. For " I told you before," 
says he, " and foretel you as if I were present the second 
time, and being absent, now I write to them, which here- 
tofore have sinned, and to all other, that if I come again, I 
will not spare* ^ And again — ^'^ I write these things, being 
absent, lest being present, I should use sharpness, accord- 
ing to the power which the Lord hath given me to edificationy 
and not to destruction.''''^ Though Dr. Campbell could not 
but perceive, that these expressions gave little countenance 
to his coiigregational, or independent scheme, yet by trans- 
lating the words*— w* tirClk^^ka, uvln v)^ vTo Iwv itXejovwv*--''' the cen^ 
sure which was infticted by the community, ^^ instead of-^*- 
*^ this punish?nfnt which was inflicted of many," he would 
seem to insinuate, that the incestuous person was excom- 
municated by a vote of the congregation; when the fact was, 
that, without referring the matter at all to them, St. Paul 
himself had passed the sentence, as he tells us in these 
words—" I verily as absent in body, but present in spirit, 
have judged already, as though I were present, concerning 
him, that hath so done this deed ; in the name of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, 
with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such 
a one unto Satan, for the destruction of the flesh, that the 
spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."'|' The 
apostle then proceeds to show, what should be the effect of 
this sentence, by enjoining those to whom he wrote, to 
" put away from among them the excommunicated person, 
not to keep company with him, and with such an one, no 
not to eat ;" which abhorrence of his company and conver- 

as you shall forgive, I will forgive also," But will any man say, that in 
ordinary cases, the viceroy's power, in consequence of such a speech, 
would have been considered as the same Avith the sovereign's? 
• 2 Cor. xiii. 2, 10. f 1 Cor. v. 3, 4, 5. 



116 General Defence of Episcopaci/, 

sation, would of course bring him into public disgrace^ and 
that disgrace was the punishment which the Christian peo* 
pie had to inflict, in consequence of their apostle's sen- 
tence. 

But the strain of declamation, in which Dr. Campbell 
indulges on this subject, seems all intended to afford him 
an opportunity, not only of giving a favourable view of the 
discipline of his own church ; which, unless w\xh regard to 
" churches and manses, and some other things of little mo- 
ment," he considers as perhaps the most unexceptionable 
now to be met with; but also of representing in a very dif- 
ferent light, " the polity and discipline" of the church of 
England, which, he seems to think, have been " devised, 
for the express purpose of rendering the clerical character 
odious, and the discipline contemptible." As a proof of this, 
he tells his audience, that " ecclesiastical censures, in Eng- 
land, have now no regard, agreeably to their original 
destination, to purity and manners ;" supposing, no doubt, 
that his presbyterian students would never look into the 
Book of Common Prayer of the Chitrek of England^ where, 
in the rubric prefixed to the communion service, and which 
was made a part of, and confirmed by, an act of parlia- 
ment, the minister is expressly ordered to admit, or not to 
admit to the Lord's table, according to what he knows of 
the life and conversation of the person applying for admis- 
sion ; and in case of " repelling any," he is " obliged to give 
an account of the same to his ordinary, who shall proceed 
against the offending person according to the canon," 
How then can it be said, that such " ecclesiastical censures 
have no regard to purity and manners ?" Yes — says Dr. 
Campbell-—" the participation of one of the sacraments 
having been with them, by a very short-sighted policy, 
perverted into a test for civil offices, a minister may be 
compelled by the magistrate, to admit a man who is well 
known to be a most improper person, an atheist, bias- 



General Defence of Episcopacy,- 1 1 y 

phemer, or profligate."* The history of this test^ and the 
causes which gave rise to it, and still operate in the opinion 
of the legislature, as a sufficient ground for its continuance, 
must have been well known to our learned professor ; who 
must also have known, had he but taken the trouble to in- 
quire, that no such compulsion as that which he supposes^ 
is ever experienced by any minister of the church of Eng* 
land;f and therefore the coarse expression might have 
been spared, which alludes to the test, as " a coarse im- 
plement of human authority, to compel a thing of so deli- 
cate a nature as true religion." The coarseness complained 
of lies not in the implement, but in the disposition of those 
who are tempted to abuse, or apply it to a wrong purpose ; 
and such temptations will always occur, where the profes- 
sion of religion is accompanied with those worldly advant- 
ages, which, in some shape or other, are often connected 
with it, even when embraced in its greatest purity. 

Having observed our Lecturer taking so much pains to 
convince his pupils, that the discipline of his own church, 
though infinitely preferable to that of the church of Eng- 
land, was yet far short of the pure apostolic model, by 
\f\{\c\\ xht^ congregational OY independent churches are dis- 
tinguished, we might have supposed, that any farther 

• Lecture iii. 

f See this matter very fully discussed by the learned Bishop Sherlock, 
in his * Arguments against the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts.* 
** The test act," says that able prelate, " forces no clergyman to give the 
sacrament to atheists and debauchees, or any other offenders, if they be 
openly and notoriously such: and if they are such only in secret, they 
are out of the question ; for no clergyman's conscience can be burdened 
for admitting an unknown offender to the sacrament. If a clergyman 
proceed with discretion and charity, and according to the rules prescribed 
him by authority, he has as little to fear from a man with a place, as from 
a man without one; and if he be unjustly and vexatiously sued for doing 
his duty, the law will give him costs." — Such was the opinion of an 
English prelate, who, in regard to this matter, must surely have known 
what was " the law of the land," and the power of the magistrate, as 
well as any Scotch professor. 

\ 



118 General Defence of Episcopaq/* 

inquiry into the original form of church governmentt w*9 
either quite unnecessary, or at least a matter of so little 
moment as not to require any long or serious discussion,— 
For if it be true, that all ecclesiastical authority is derived 
from the people, and that the very distinction between 
clergy and laity, has its only foundation in the will and 
choice of the Christian community, appointing what '19 
proper for the preservation of order and decency in their 
religious assemblies ; in that case, the question, whether 
the persons set apart in the apostolic age for that pur^ 
pose, were of one, or two, or three orders ; or what were 
the powers with which they were supposed to be invested, 
is so frivolous in itself, and of so little weight in the scale 
of our duty as Christians, as hardly to require or merit 
the slightest examination. Yet trifling as it must have 
appeared in the eyes of Dr. CampbeU, and of| such of hig 
students as viewed it in the same light with him, he obliged 
them to attend to it, through seven of his lectures ; " the 
subject of which," He told them, " was the internal polity 
of the church, and the form she has insensibly assumed ; 
with the rules of subordination which have obtained, and 
in many places do still obtain in the different orders." 

In following him through the course of this inquiiy, W^ 
are presented with a regular chain of " steps, advancing 
from presbytery to parochial Episcopacy, thence to prelacy 
or diocesan Episcopacy, from that to metropolitical pri- 
macy, thence again to patriarchal superintendency," and 
landing at last in the papal supremacy. The first three of 
these steps are all with which, properly speaking, we are 
concerned, in defending our own ecclesiastical polity ; and 
through these we shall endeavour to trace his progress, 
with as much order as his frequent excursions will permit. 
Before we are regularly introduced to the first step of his 
course, we find several things premised^ and laid down for 
our direction, which, as I observed already, would seem 
to render quite unnecessary all that follows, respecting the 



General Defence of Episcopacy.' i 1^ 

different forms of ecclesiastical administration. For in the 
most unqualified language, we are plainly told, that " the 
terms of the gospel covenant are no where, in the sa- 
cred pages, connected with, or made to depend on, either 
the minister^ or the form of the ministry ;"* although he 
had just before quoted our Lord's own declaration of the 
terms of the gospel covenant in these words — '' He that 
believeth, and is baptized^ shall be saved ;" which surely 
implies his being baptized after the form and manner 
pointed out in the commission which Christ gave his 
apostles, at the very time when he made this declaration. 
If baptism then must be considered as one of the terms, 
or conditions of salvation, how can it be said to have no 
dependence on the minister, or no connection with the 
form of his ministry ? Are we to understand our Lec- 
turer's words, as intended to teach his pupils, that our 
Lord's apostles acquired no particular authority from the 
commission which he gave them, for making all nations 
his disciples, by baptizing them ; and that the form of bap- 
tism laid down in that commission, was not more valid, 
or more necessary to be observed, than any other form, 
which might be adopted for the same purpose ? Then, to 
be sure, the original form of government in the church is 
a matter of no consequence ; and it is perfectly ridiculous 
to give ourselves any trouble in inquiring, or reasoning 
about it. Every one that pleases, may take on himself the 
office of a minister; and every form of ministry is equally 
consistent with the terms, and productive of the benefits, 
of the gospel covenant. 

The same inference must undoubtedly be drawn from 
the account which is afterwards given of the apostolic 
commission, where we are told by this learned explainer of 
the " sacred pages," that — " the first order given to the 
eleven to make converts^ to baptize^ and to teach, can'ies 

* Lecture iv. 



120 General Defence of Episcopacy. 

in it nothing from which we can discover, that it was a 
commission entrusted to them exclusively as apostles or 
ministers, and not given them also as Christians ; and that 
the apostles were particularized, because best qualified, 
from their long attendance on Christ's ministry, for pro- 
moting his religion in the world; but not with a view to 
exclude any Christians, who were capable, from co-operat- 
ing with them in the same good cause."* We had just 
before been told of a " similitude taken from temporal 
things," for the better illustration of this dark and difficult 
subject ; and by the help of a little freedom of the same 
kind, in which, we hope, there is no harm, we now dis- 
cover, that Dr. Campbell's so long possessing the theolo- 
gical chair in Marischal College, and instructing his pupils 
in the knowledge of sound divinity, was not in consequence 
of his having received any commission or authority for that 
purpose, but merely because he was " best qualified" for 
discharging the duties of the office, and none else were 
" capable of co-operating with him in the same good 
'cause."f 

* Lecture Iv. 

t This point is well illustrated by another " similitude," which the 
Anti-Jacobin Reviewer of Dr. Campbell's work thus happily makes use 
of. ' It is not probable, that his Majesty's commission to the president 
pf the supreme court of law in Scotland, expressly prohibits all other law- 
yers from executing that office, to which it appoints him; and it is cer- 
tainly not improbable, that there are many lawyers at the Scotch bar 
perfectly well qualified to preside over any court of law in that part df 
the united kingdom. Yet what would Dr. Campbell have thought of 
the man, who, having formed opinions of the constitution of courts of 
law, similar to those which he had himself formed of the constitution of 
the Christian church, should have said — " There is nothing in the com- 
mission given to the president of the court of session, from which we can 
discover that it is a commission entrusted to him exclusively, as a 
judge, and not given to him also as a lawyer; and that he is particu- 
larized in it, only because he is best qualified for discharging the duties 
of the office, but not with a view to exclude any lawyer who is capable, 
from occasionally taking possession of his chair, and presiding with 
authority over the court ?'* 



General Defence of Episcopacy » 121 

But that the opinion which led to this similitude was 
the " construction put upon the apostolic charge, in the 
days of the apostles," we are told, " appears not impro- 
bable, from the subsequent part of the scripture history ; 
for Philip the deacon baptized the Ethiopian eunuch; Peter 
trusted the charge of baptizing Cornelius and his family, 
to the Christian brethren who attended him ; Ananias, a 
disciple, was employed to baptize Paul ; and Paul says of 
himself, that Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach 
the gospel." 

With respect to the first of these instances, it is said, 
that " Philip, though no apostle, and probably at that time 
no more than a deacon, (that is, a trustee for the poor in 
matters purely secular) did all to the Ethiopian eunuch, 
which the apostles had in charge with regard to all nations. 
He converted, baptized, and taught him." And so he well 
might, when the " angel of the Lord" had sent him on the 
journey, which led to this conversion, and the " spirit" 
directed him how to proceed in it. Our Lecturer takes no 
notice of this circumstance, or of the account which is 
given of the appointment of the seven deacons ; who, 
though men " full of the Holy Ghost," were yet solemnly 
©rdained by prayer, and the laying on of the apostles' 
hands ; which evidently shows, that this same deacon, or 
*^ trustee for the poor," as he is here called for the sake 
of lessening his sacred character, was something more, 
even in office, than those, who are thought to supply the 
place of deacons under the Scotch establishment^; and being 
also directed by an immediate vision, or inspiration from 
heaven, was sufficiently warranted in all that he did for the 
benefit of his Ethiopian convert. 

A second instance produced from scripture in support of 
our author's opinion, respecting the nature of the apostolic 
commission, is the relation of what happened, " when 
Peter was sent to open the door of faith to the Gentiles, by 
the conversion of Cornelius and his family." To prepare 

16 



122 General Defence of ]^piscopacy^ 

the way for that merciful event, an angel of God was seiit 
to the devout centurion, not to instruct him directly in the 
faith of Christ, but to inform him of one, who " should 
tell him what he ought to do.'* This necessary knowledge 
of his duty Was to be obtained, not from the first well-in- 
formed Christian, who could be found to impart it, but 
from an apostle of Christ, who was to be brought from a 
considerable distance for that purpose 2 which clearly 
shows, that the commission, iii virtue of which the apos- 
tles acted, was so " exclusively entrusted to theiri as apos* 
ties," that not even an angel from heaven was allowed to 
intermeddle with any thing that belonged to it. An apos- 
tle, therefore, having been sent for j having come to Come* 
lius, and having found, that " on all those in his house, 
who heard the word, the gift of the Holy Ghost had been 
poured out" in a most wonderful and conspicuous manner^ 
he naturally puts this question to " the six brethren who 
accompanied him," — »" Can any man forbid water, that 
these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy 
Ghost as well as we ?" And then we read, that " he com-' 
manded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord;"^ 
that is, he gave authority to those that were with him to 
administer the sacrament of baptism j and surely no person 
can doubt his right to delegate such authority, in conse- 
quence of the commission which he himself had received 
from Christ for that very purpose. When all these cir- 
cumstances are duly considered,— the previous falling of 
the Holy Qhost upon these first fruits of the Gentiles,-^ 
the presence of an apostle,— the attendance of certain 
brethren j an apostolic command empowering these brethren 
to baptize the converted family ; it is hardly possible to con- 
ceive a train of facts more directly contrary to the popular 
claim set up by Dr. Campbell, than what appears in the 
history of the conversion of Cornelius, and the means by 

* Acts X. 47, 48. 



General Defence of Episcopacy^ 123 

which he and his family were received into the church of 
Christ. 

What is said of " Ananias, a disciple, being employed 
to baptize Paul," is as little to the purpose ior which it is 
brought forward, since we know not of what rank in the 
church this disciple was, and the apostles themselves are 
frequently caled disciples ; neither is it positively said, that 
Ananias baptized Paul, any more than that Peter baptized 
Cornelius. And if Ananias' saying to Paul, " Arise and 
be baptized," proves that in consequence of this command 
Paul received baptism from his hands, it may with equal 
reason be inferred, that Peter's commanding Cornelius to 
be baptized, proves the office to have been performed by 
the apostle. In both cases, however, there was a direct 
communication from heaven ; and when Ananias acted un- 
der divine influence, and according to what " the Lord said 
to him in a vision," we cannot doubt of his having sufficient 
authority for what he did, whether he was ordained or not 
by the hands of men ; and from all that the sacred historian 
tells us of him, no man can say, that he was not so ordained. 
Even from our Lecturer's own words — ^" Ananias, a dis- 
ciple, was employed to baptize Paul," it may be justly con- 
cluded, that the disciple was duly authorized by his Master 
and Employer: And a similar inference may be drawn 
from what Dr. Campbell acknowledges of St. Paul's " say- 
ing himself of his own mission^ that Christ sent him not 
to baptize, but to preach the gospel ;" which clearly shows, 
that, since we are certain he did baptize^ as well as preachy 
it was the apostle's own opinion, that he could not regu- 
larly do either the one or the other without being sent. 

In all these instances,* produced from the scripture 

• The same instances, and the sanne arguments founded upon them, 
were produced some years ago, for a similar purpose, by another mi- 
nister of the Scotch establishment, in a work, entitled — An Inquiry into the 
Powers of Ecclesiastics, ij'c. and which was taken due notice of at the 
time of its publication. 



124 General Defence of Episcopacy'. 

history, we have now seen what ground there is for the 
construction which our author wishes to show was put 
upon the apostoHc charge, in the days of the apostles, and 
particularly what was then the opinion of Christians, with 
respect to the power of baptizing'^ " which," he says, 
" compared with preaching, though a part, was but an in- 
ferior and subordinate part of an apostle's charge." Yet 
was it particularly specified in the apostolic commission, 
and pointed out as the instituted means, whereby the con- 
verted nations were to be brought to Christ, and entered 
into his school, for the purpose of being " taught to ob- 
serve all things whatsoever he had commanded."— -How 
then can it be thought, that the administration of baptism 
was not an essential part of the commission given to the 
apostles, and given to them exclusively, not as Christians, 
but as apostles, persons '^ sent by Christ, even as. the Father 
had sent him," with power to provide for the regular trans- 
mission of the same authority to " preach and baptize^ even 
unto the end of the world ?" 

Indeed, our Lecturer seems to have been aware of his 
having gone too far, in giving such a degrading account of 
baptism, and in assigning such unlimited power to the 
*' community at large," for the administration of it ; and^ 
therefore, he adds a sort of caution against any improper 
inference that might be drawn from what he had said on 
the subject, by telling us, that " nothing here advanced can 
justly be understood to combat the propriety of limiting, 
for the sake of discipline, the power of baptizing to fewer 
hands, than that of preaching, when once a fixed ministiy 
is settled in a church, and regulations are adopted for its 
government." — But if it be true, as he had said before, 
that " the first order given to the eleven to baptize^ was 
with no view of excluding^ any Christians, who were capable, 
from co-operating with them ;" who are they that could 
afterwards pretend to alter that order, or make an exclusion^ 
where none was intended ? If Christ himself allowed, and 



General Defence of Episcopacy. 125 

gave his apostles authority to permit, the promiscuous 
liberty of baptizing to all Christians, who were capable of 
using it; who but these apostles, as acting for Christ, could 
with any " propriety limit" the general power, with which 
he had thus indulged all his capable disciples ? If Dr. 
Campbell's presbytery^ as succeeding to the apostles, or 
rather coming after them, (for strictly speaking, he allows 
them no successors) did for the sake of discipline, consider 
such a limitation proper, and make it accordingly ; was not 
this as flagrant an encroachment upon the ^' rights" of the 
people made over to them by Christ, as what he so bitterly 
complains of in the diocesan bishops, when they began to 
limit the powers, and encroach upon the rights of their 
brethren presbyters? It might also be asked, who they 
were, that could take upon them to ^' settle a fixed ministry 
in a church," different from that which the apostles had 
settled ; or were entitled to appoint " regulations to be 
adopted for its government," if all " capable Christians" 
had an equal right to share in that government, and none 
were set apart for judging of their brethren's capacities ? 

These are questions which our Professor well knew it 
would be difficult to answer ; and conscious, as it were, of 
the necessity of sheltering, under something like primitive 
authority, what he had advanced, respecting the right of 
private Christians to exercise those offices, which have long 
been considered as peculiar to a public ministry, he tells us 
, — *" The doctrine I have been illustrating, so far from 
being, as some Romanists ignorantly pretend, one of the 
many novelties sprung from the protestant schism, was 
openly maintained at Rome without censure, about the 
middle of the fourth century, by Hilary, a deacon of that 
church, a man of erudition and discernment ; whose opinion, 
it seems, as here represented, was, that, " at first, for the 
increase of converts, it was allowed to all without disting- 

* Lecture iv. 



126 General Defence of Episcopactf* 

tion, to preach, to baptize, and to explain the scriptuves in 
the church."^ Such is the doctrine which this author is 
made to teach by giving a few extracts from his exposition 
of the fourth chapter of the epistle to the Ephesians ; in 
which, finding a number of church officers mentioned by 
St. Paul, as having been given by Christ for the work of 
the ministry, he wished to make it appear, that even in his 
time, they were all retained, though under diiferent names: 
and as the practice then was to administer baptism only on 
certain days, and at stated seasons, we can easily discover 
what this " man of erudition and discernment" means, 
when he says — ^that " at first— all taught, and all baptized, 
whenever occasion called, without any distinction of days 

* The words quoted by Dr. Campbell from the commentary of Hilary, 
who is usually called the Pseudo- Ambrose, and which had been quoted by 
Mr, Anderson, of Dunbarton, for the same purpose, are these — " Post- 
quam omnibus locis, ecclesiac sunt constitutse, et officia ordinata, aliter 
composita res est quam coeperat ; primum enim omnes docebant, et omnes 
baptizabant, quibuscunque diebus vel temporibus fuisset occasio." A 
little after, " Neque Petrus diaconos habuit, quando Cornelium, cum omn» 
domo ejus baptizavit; nee ipse, sed jussit fratribus qui cum illo ierant ad 
Cornelium ab Joppe." Again ; " U* ergo cresceret plebs, et multiplicaretur, 
omnibus inter initia concessum est, et evangelizare, et baptizare, et scrip- 
tirras in ecclesia explanare." Such, we are tdd, " were the sentiments 
of a respectable member of the Roman presbytery in those days ;" but 
we are not told, what was more certain, that this same Hilary attached 
himself to one of the most violent men of those days, Lucifer of Cagliari^ 
and was so far from giving any countenance to the opinion, that all 
Christians had a right to administer the sacraments, that he zealously- 
contended for the necessity of re-baptizing heretics, and all those whose 
baptism had been in any respect irregular ; on which account, his con- 
temporary Jerome sarcastically called him — tbe Deucalion of the worlds 
All this, Dr. Campbell might have mentioned to his pupils, and should 
also have added, what immediately follows his last quotation, in these 
words — " Ubi autem omnia loca circumplexa est ecclesia, conventicula 
constituta sunt, et rectores, et coetera officia in ecclesia ordinata sunt, ut 
nullus cle clero auderet, qui os'dinatus non esset, praesumere officium quod 
sciret non sibi creditum vel concessum ; et coepit alio ordine et provi- 
dentia gubernari ecclesia, quia si omnes eadem possent, irrationabile essel, 
et vulgaris res et vilissima videretur." 



General Defence of Episcopacy. 127 

or seasons." For by this observation, as connected with 
what goes before, and follows it, we are not to understand, 
that the sacrament of baptism was, at the beginning, admi- 
nistered by all Christians indiscriminately, but only that the 
writer of this account thought it was then administered, as 
occasion required, by all those, to whom he had been allud- 
ing, the apostles^ prophets^ evangelists^ pastors and teachers^ 
who St. Paul had said, " were given by the Lord, for the 
perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for 
the edifying of the body of Christ." Whether Hilary was 
right or wrong, in supposing that those who were thus 
given for the service of the church, were called to it by 
the immediate impulse of the Holy Spirit, and not or- 
dained by men, we need not stop to inquire, since, if the 
case really was so, there could be no doubt of their having 
sufficient authority for what they did, and no danger that 
what was done by them would not be deemed regular and 
valid by those who knew them to be acting under such 
divine influence. 

Not satisfied, however, with resting the truth of his 
opinion on the authority of his favourite Hilar}, which we 
see affords it at best but a very weak and questionable sup- 
port, our Lecturer appeals next to the testimony of a wri- 
ter a little more ancient, and whom he treats in the same 
way as he had treated his " respectable member of the 
Roman presbytery," by detaching a sentence or two, with- 
out giving the whole of the argument to which they refer. 
This writer is Tertullian, who, in his Exhortation to 
Chastity^ inveighing against second marriages, and having 
proved, as he thought, that they were prohibited to the 
clergy, makes use of this argument for extending the pro- 
hibition to the laity, that the distinction which prevailed in 
his day between the priesthood and the people, must have 
been only of the church's making ; for, says he, " where 
there is no meeting of the ecclesiastical order, thou ofFerest 
and baptizest, and art single a priest to thyself. But three 



128 General Defence of Episcopa&y, 

persons, though laymen, make a church,"* as Dr. Camp- 
bell renders this last sentence, and then adds—" It matters 
nothing to the present question, that his doctrine of the 
unlawfulness of second marriages is unreasonable; it mat- 
ters nothing that his argument is inconclusive ; we are con- 
cerned only with the fact, to which he refers as notorious ;" 
—whereas the truth is, that instead of being 2ifact at aU, it 
is merely an inference drawn from very absurd premises, to 
serve a particular purpose, and by the same author, who in 
his Book on Baptism^ in answer to the question — Who may 
baptize ? says — " The chief priest, who is the bishop, has 
the right of giving baptism, and after him the presbyters 
and deacons, but not without the bishop's authority, "f In 
these words, it is plainly laid down, we might say, as " a 
notorious fact," not only, that there were these three orders 
in the church, of which the bishop was the chief, but also 
that even deacons or presbyters could not baptize, or of con- 
sequence perform any other ministerial acts, but by autho- 
rity derived from him. The same author, in his Prescrip- 
tions against Heretics^ says—" Among them a bishop to- 
day is not so to-morrow; a deacon to-day is a reader to- 
morrow ; to-day a presbyter, a layman to-morrow ; for 
they enjoin priestly offices even upon laymen :"J thus point- 
ing out as one of the grossest irregularities prevalent among 
these heretics, what Dr. Campbell wishes to represent as a 
duty, which every private Christian, if capable, is bound to 
perform. 

But of all the strange things advanced in this fourth 
lecture now under our consideration, that which must excite 



* TertuUian's wards are — " Adeo ubi ecclesiastici ordinis non est con- 
sessus, et offers, et tinguis, et sacerdos tibi solus. Sed ubi tres, ecclesia 
est, licit laici." 

•f His words are — " Dandi quidem jus habet summus sacerdos, qui est 
Episcopus, dehinc presbyteri et diacoui, non tamen sine Episcopi anctori- 
tate." 

4 " Nam et laicis sacerdotalia munera injungunt»" 



Verier al Defence of Episcopacy* 129 

die greatest degree of surprise, is his attempt to represent 
the congregational scheme of ecclesiastical polity, which 
he is so anxious to defend, as " conformahle to the doc- 
trine of the church of England."* In proof of this agree- 
ment, he brings forward the latter part of her twenty-third 
article, entituled — Of ministering' in the Congregation ; 
where it is said — '' those we ought to judge lawfully called 
and sent, which be chosen, and called to this work, by 
men, who have public authority given unto them in the 
congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's 
vineyard. This," he says, " if it 7nean any thing, and be 
not a mere identical proposition, of which, I own, it has 
some appearance, refers us ultimately to that authority, 
however modelled^ which satisfies the people^ and is settled 
among them,'''' It is but fair, however, notwithstanding this 
ingenious and polite remark, to let the church of England 
speak for herself, as most likely to be the best interpreter 
of her own meaning. And if we turn to her thirty-sixth 
article, which our Lecturer has kept out of sight, because 
there can be no doubt as to what it meansy we find her there 
declaring, that — " the book of consecration of archbishops 
and bishops, and ordering of priests and deacons, lately 
set forth in the time of Edward the VI. and confirmed at 
the same time by authority of parliament, doth contain all 
things necessary to such consecration and ordering; mither 
has it any thing that of itself is superstitious and ungodly. 
And, therefore, whosoever are, or shall be consecrated 
or ordered according to the rites of that book, we decree 
all such to be rightly, orderly and lawfully consecrated and 
ordered." 

Now, the preface to that book, thus confirmed and sanc- 
tioned, ("and which preface is as much a part of the viocirine 
of the church of England as the thirty-nme articles) runs 
in these terms, so plain, that they cannot be mistaken. 

• Lecture iv. 

17 



130 General Defence of EpiscopCtcij* 

" It is evident unto all men, diligently reading hoiy 
scripture, and ancient authors, that from the apostles' time 
there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's churchy 
bishops^ priests and deacons: Which offices were evermore 
had in such reverend estimation, that no man might pre- 
sume to execute any of them except he were first called, 
tried, examined, and known to have such qualities as were 
I'equisite for the same ; and also by public prayer, with 
imposition of hands^ were approved, and admitted thereunto 
by lawful authority. And, therefore, to the intent that 
these orders may be continued, and reverently used and 
esteemed in the church of England, no man shall be ac- 
counted, or taken to be a lawful bishops priest or deacon in 
the church of England, or suffered to execute any of tht 
said functions^ except he be called, tried, examined, and 
admitted thereunto, according to the form hereafter follow- 
ing^ or hath had formerly Episcopal consecration or ordina* 
tionJ'^ Had Dr* Campbell introduced into his lecture this 
preface^ as well as her twenty-third article^ he could not 
have easily brought his pupils to believe, even on his word, 
that the church of England " has not presumed to delineate 
the essentials of a Christian ministry, or to saj'^ any thing 
tvhich could be construed to exclude those who are go- 
verned in a different manner from that in which she herself 
rs governed."^' 

It was equally unfair in the learned Professor, not to tell 
his youthful audience, in explaining to them the doctrine of 
the church of England, that at the time when her thirty- 
nine articles were drawn up, the word congregation made 
use of in the tzventy-third article had precisely the same sig- 
nification as the word churchy and was used with the same 

* See Lectufe iv. where Dr. Campbell has evidently borrowed from 
Mr. Anderson, of Dunbarton, who affirms — " that the 19th and 23d articles 
of the church of England are conceived in such general words, on pur- 
pose that they nnight not be thought to exclude other churches that differ Jrom 
them i?i point of government.'* Page 38 of the work already mentioned. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 131 

iatitude* Indeed, the two terms were at that time considered 
so perfectly synonymous, that in the translation of the bible 
then used, Christ is called the " Head of the congregation^ 
which is his body ;" and is mentioned as saying to Peter— ^ 
*' On this rock I will build my congregation.'^ To the same 
purpose we are told, that forty years after the drawing up of 
the thirty-nine articles, the word congregation was used in 
the canonical prayer before sermons, lectures and homilies, 
in which they were directed " to pray for the whole congre* 
gation of Christian people dispersed throughout the whole 
world."^ Hence it is evident, that the meaning of the ar- 
ticle in question is plainly this — " It is not lawful," that is 
'^^by the laxv of God^ for " any man to take upon him the 
office of public preaching or ministering the sacraments in 
the congregation," or " church of Christy before he be thus 
lawfully called and sent to execute the same. And those we 
ought to judge lawfully called and sent," according to the 
laiv of God, which be chosen " and called to this work, by 
men who have thus public authority given unto them in the 
congregation," or church of Christ, " to call and send mi- 
nisters into the Lord's vineyard." The lawfulness of such 
public authority must mean its conformity to the laws of 
God, because the bishops and clergy assembled in convoca- 
tion, who were the compilers of the articles, not being civil 
judges, had no right to declare what was lawful, by the laws 
of the land, or any temporal statvites, but only what they 
deemed to be lawful, according to the laws of God, laid 
down in scripture for the spiritual government of his church. 
And as the twenty-third article is sufficient to show the ne- 
cessity of such a lawful commission, so the thirty-sixth arti- 
cle plainly declares that the persons invested with such com- 
mission, are the bishops, priests and deacons, who are duly 
consecrated and ordered, according to the rites of the book 
referred to in that article ; and in which book the church of 

* See Brett's Divine Right of Episcopacy, life. 



132 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 

England, by her prayers to Almight>' (iod, acknowledges 
her belief that every one of these orders was appointed by 
his Holy Spirit^ and therefore was certainly of divine insti- 
tution. Surely then we may now leave it with our readers 
to determine on what ground Dr. Campbell could be jus- 
tified in saying, that the church of England has " avoided 
limiting the Christian ministry to one particular model." 

Whether he has done justice to his own church in as- 
signing the same doctrine and conduct to he^ is a point 
which we are not called upon to decide ; although we can- 
not help taking notice of the unnatural association which 
he endeavours to establish between the doctrine of the 
church of England, and that of the Westminster Confession 
of Faith, the authors of which, at the very time of com- 
piling it, entertained such a mortal enmity against that 
church, that they had sworn in their solemn league and co- 
venant, to " endeavour, without respect of persons, the ex- 
tirpation of prelacy, with all ecclesiastical officers depend- 
ing on that hierarchy." It cannot be difficult to perceive 
how far this conduct in the authors is entitled to the praise 
of ^•' moderation," which our Lecturer bestows on the 
doctrine of his Westminster confession, " which," he says, 
*' is of equal authority with us, as the thirty-nine articles 
are of in England ;" and then, after quoting the following 
words from the 25th chapter of it, " Unto the catholic 
visible church, Christ has given the ministry, oracles and 
ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the 
saints in this life, to the end of the world ;" he immediately 
adds — " And this is all that is said on the subject." We 
should suppose, however, that something more is said on 
the subject, when, in the 27th chapter of the same con- 
fession, we find these words — " There be only two sacra- 
ments ordained by Christ our Lord, neither of which may 
be dispensed by any but by a minister of the word law- 
fully ordained,'*'' And if we wish to know how, in their 
judgment, a minister of the word is kavfully ordained, we 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 133 

are referred, by a v^eiy sensible and spirited reviewer of 
Dr. Campbell's lectures, to xh^ form of presbyter lal church 
government^ agreed upon by the assembly of divines at 
Westminster, and of equal authority with the Confession 
of Faith^ where we shall find it decreed — that " every mi- 
nister of the word be ordained by imposition of hands ^ and 
praver, with fasting, by ikvost preaching presbyters to whom 
it doth belong."* 

The church of England, however, is weU able to defend* 
the doctrine of her own articles and liturgy,— 'V^'ith. the 
Westminster Confession of Faith we have at present no 
concern, farther than to take notice of Dr. Campbell's very 
partial appeal to its decision. But there is another point, 
which he brings forward, as particularly applicable to those 
of the Episcopal persuasion in this country, and to which 
It behoves us, therefore, to direct our attention, with a 
view to defend ourselves from the imputation of inconsis- 
tency^, in a matter of such importance. It is stated in the 
following words — " I shall add to these the doctrine of the 
Episcopal reformed church of Scotland, contained in a 
confession of faith ratified by law in this country in 15^7 ; 
which, though set aside in the time of the civil wars, to 
make room for the Westminster confession, was re-enacted 
after the restoration, and continued in force till the aboli- 
tion of prelacy at the revolution." In the very beginning 
of this statement we meet with an expression, which must 
appear a little ambiguous, and not easy to be understood, 
as made use of by a writer of Dr. Campbell's professional 
character. — When we look back to the date which he fixes 
for the legal ratification of this confession of faith, it is 
natural for us to ask, what he means, by saying, that " it 
contains the doctrine of the Episcopal reformed church of 
Scotland ?" It was drawn up by those early reformers who 
called themselves " the congregation," of which the famous 

• See the Anti-Jacobin Review for May, 18G1, p. 21. 



1 54 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

John Knox was the great leader and director : and we 
know, that in the ParHament which gave it a legal sanc^. 
tion, there were some bishops^ and men of Episcopal prin-. 
ciples. But could Dr. Campbell consistently acknowledge 
that these persons were on the reforming side, or had any 
leading hand in bringing forward this new confession, when 
such an acknowledgment would directly fly in the face of 
that fundamental article of the claim of rights which led ta 
** the abolition of prelacy at the revolution," and declared 
*' this to be one cause of" such abolition, that the " nation 
had reformed from popery by presbyters .^" 

We must, therefore, suppose, that our Lecturer's vaguo 
appellation of the " Episcopal reformed church of Scot-, 
land," can only be applicable to the state of that church at 
the time when she was regularly formed and constituted, 
according to the true Episcopal model. And on this sup^ 
position we need not wonder, that her Confession of Faith 
was set aside to make room for that of the Westminster 
reformers, who, no doubt, found their own Confession 
more suitable to the purpose of that " solenan league and 
covenant," by which they were bound to effect, if they 
could, the extirpation of prelacy, and every thing connected 
with it. But when our Professor thought proper to men- 
tion the " re-enacting of the former confession after the 
restoration," he should also have informed his students, 
that the act which restored the former Episcopal govern- 
ment, declared that government to be most " agreeable to 
the word of God." And if he had likewise taken notice 
that the re-enacting the confession alluded to, and " con- 
tinuing it in force till the revolution," was a thing far from 
pleasing to the bishops of that period ; it was no more than 
what plainly appeared from the jealousy which they ex- 
pressed, in regard to the test act, as it was called, in 1681, 
which imposed this confession upon them, under a solemn 
oath, enforced bv severe penalties. So great indeed was 
their alarm on that account, that some of them refused to 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 1 35 

lake the oath in the sense which was then put upon it by 
the enemies of the Episcopal establishment, till their scru- 
ples were removed by an explanatory act of council^ de- 
claring, that " though the confession of 1560, being framed 
in the infancy of the reformation, deserves due praise ; yet 
they were not required to swear to every proposition or 
clause in it, but only to the true protestant religion con- 
tained there ; and that in the test there is no encroachment 
upon the intrinsic spiritual power of the church, as exer- 
cised by the apostles, and the most pure and primitive 
church of the three first centuries ; nor any danger from 
it to the Episcopal government of this national church, 
which is again declared to be most agreeable to the word 
of God." 

But there would have been no occasion for our taking 
any notice of this old confession^ if Dr. Campbell had 
©ot thought proper to make it the ground of a very 
contemptuous and unjust reflection, conveyed in these 
Words — " I recur to it the rather," says he, " in order to 
show how much, on this article, the sentiments of our late 
nonjurors (for we have none of that description at present) 
differ from the sentiments of those whom they considered 
as their ecclesiastical predecessors, and from whom they 
derived their spiritual pedigree."* Here are several 
marks of distinction made use of, and all with a view to 
throw some reproach on the persons thus distinguished. 
They are said to have been lately nonjurors. But if they 
are not so now^ was it fair to hold them up in such an of- 
fensive light ? They considered themselves as having had 
*' ecclesiastical predecessors ;" and as that implies such a 
thing as " ecclesiastical succession," nothing more was 
necessary to expose them to ridicule, unless perhaps to 
brand such " succession" with the odious name of " spiritual 
pedigree." Yet, notwithstanding all this load of contempt 

* Lecture iv. 



136 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

laid on the late nonjurors ; as they have still, it seems, suc- 
cessors, whom our Lecturer afterwards distii,'guishes by 
the title of the " Scotch Episcopal party," he should have 
considered how far they acknowledged the relation to which 
he alludes, before he involved them in the censure of 
" differing so much in their sentiments" from those, whom 
he, perhaps, not they, " considered as their ecclesiastical pre- 
decessors." He could not but know, that for many years 
after the reformation was begun in Scotland, various forms 
of ecclesiastical polity were adopted, one after another, and 
under as many different denominations. But did he ever 
hear, from sufficient authority, that any of these was 
acknowledged by the " late nonjurors," to have been the 
" Episcopal reformed church of Scotland r" Did he ever 
hear that the '^ Scotch Episcopal party," as he calls them, 
would expect to find their " ecclesiastical predecessors," in 
such times of tumult and confusion, as exhibited nothing 
like a regular, well-constituted national church ? If we 
come down as far as to the year 1610, when the church of 
England gave her support in this country to the reforma- 
tion, of which she has justly been called the bulwark, and 
contributed, as she again did in 1661, to the introduc- 
tion of a real Episcopacy among us, we readily and grate- 
fully look back to the bishops and clergy, who were thus 
duly " consecrated and ordered," as really and truly our 
ecclesiastical predecessors." But we go much higher up 
for the fountain of our " spiritual pedigree," however 
lightly and sarcastically that phrase may be used by some, 
deriving it, under Christ's authority, ^*i?m his apostles, and 
only through these " predecessors," as the intermediate 
channels of conveyance, which have brought it regularly 
down to us. 

From the sentiments of these our " ecclesiastical prede- 
cessors," on the article of church government, we have 
surely not departed. And though there were more ground 
than can be shown, for bringing such a charge against us. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 3.7 

it would come but awkwardly from one, whose sentiments^ 
on this same article, differ so much as Dr. Campbell's evi- 
dently do differ from those of his " predecessors," if he 
would have allowed them to be so called, who, on obtain- 
ing their establishment in 1690, expressly declared- — " that 
the presbyterian government was not only agreeable to the 
inclinations of the people, but likewise founded on the word 
of God, and therefore of divine right."^ Yet this divine 
rights a minister and professor of that same establishment 
has rejected with disdainj and after telling his students, 
that what he had advanced on that subject " did not affect 
the lawfulness, or even, in certain circumstances, the expe- 
diency of the Episcopal model, it only exposed the arro- 
gance of pretending to a jus diviiium^'^ — lest this should be 
thought applicable only to the Episcopal pretension, he 
immediately adds—" I am satisfied that no form of polity 
can plead such an exclusive charter, as that phrase, in its 
present acceptation, is imderstood to imply. The claim 
is clearly the offspring of sectarian bigotry and ignorance." 
Such is the language now used by those, who are enjoying 
the benefits originally procured by, what, it seems, must 
at last be called, the " sectarian bigotry and ignorance" of 
their predecessors. 

Our Professor indeed had told his hearers, that though it 
was his purpose, in considering the question about the 
apostolic form of church government^ " to proceed with all 
the candour and impartiality of which he was capable ; yet 
he was to speak out boldly what appeared to him most pro- 
bably to have been the case, without considering what sect 

* 'Their great champion, Mr. Anderson, of Dmibarton, expressly de- 
clared it to be their ^^ firm belief, that there is but one govemment by 
divine right f viz. tho. presbyterian;^' and we find him drawii^g this con- 
clusion at the end of his work — " Upon the whole, I conclude that the 
presbyterian government is of divine institution." See p. o7 and 341 of 
his Defence of the Church Government, Faith, Worship aj;d Spirit of the 
Pres&yteriatis, ^c. printed at Glasgow 1714. , 

18 



/ 



138 General Defence of Episcopatiji 

or party it might either offend or gratify."^ With this 
resolution, he proceeds to the examination of the fact, and 
sets out with acknowledging, " that the apostles regularly 
established churches, and settled therein proper officers or 
ministers,f who were chiefly distinguished by the three 
terms — ^bishops or overseers, presbyters or elders, and 
deacons or attendants. Now, the doubts that have atisen 
are chiefly concerning the two first of these names— ^z5^o/)« 
2iwd presbyters ; and the question is, whether they are names 
for the same office, or for different offices."} — And then 
he immediately adds-*-" This at least is the first question $ 
for it must be owned, th^t there have been some strenuous 
advocates for the apostolical origin of Episcopacyj who 
have entirely given up the argument founded on the 
names." And when the argument is thus given up, there 
needs no longer be any question, 7^r^^ or last^ about that 
on which it is founded* 

The argument maintained by those who are advocates 
lor the apostolical origin of Episcopacy, is not founded on 
names but things ; and therefore the question is not whe- 
ther the church officers, called presbyters or elders in the 
apostles' days, might not also be called bishops or over- 
seers, as having the oversight or charge of a certain por- 
tion of the flock of Christ? but, whether in that character 
they had the apostolic power of ordaining others, and such 
authority to govern and direct the inferior overseers, as 
Was evidently committed to the highest order of church 
officers, who were afterwards peculiarly distinguished by 
the title of bishops? In the passage quoted by Dr. Camp- 
bell from the Acts of the Apostles, || there can be no doubt 
that those who are called elders, or presbyters of the 
church, are also denominated overseers or bishops. But it 
does not hence follow that they had the power of ordina- 
tion, or any such authority as was committed to Timothy, 

* Lecture Iv. f Ibid. % Ibid. \\ Acts xx, 17, 28. 



%. 



General Defence of Episcopacy n 1 39 

when he was appointed to take charge of the church at 
Ephesus, as its proper bishop and governor. If we only 
observe the difference in the apostle's directions to him and 
to them, we need no other proof that these presbyters were 
uot authori;zed to execute those offices, for discharging 
which Timothy had been purposely set over them. In St. 
Paul's admonitions to them, he puts them in mind of their 
duty as pastors, and warns them to " take heed to them- 
selves, and to all that part of God's flock," as distinguished 
from the shepherds, which was entrusted to their care 
and oversight : Whereas in the charge given to Timothy, 
he is empowered to watch over, not the flock only, but the 
shepherds also, the subordinate clergy as well as the laity, 
in that part of the church committed to his inspection. — 
There were some things, which he was not only to " com- 
mand and teach," but to charge others, that they should 
teach them also. Such as were proposed for the office of 
deacons, he was to prove and examine, and if found blame- 
less, to admit them to it ; that so, " by using the office of 
a deacon well, they might purchase to themselves a good 
degree," and in due time be found fit for a higher station 
in the church ; even for discharging the duties of elders or 
presbyters. Against these presbyters, Timothy was di- 
rected to " receive no accusation, but before two or three 
witnesses : and them that sinned he was to rebuke before 
all, without preferring one before another," and, like an 
equitable judge, '^ doing nothing by partiality." In a word, 
he was charged to '^ lay hands suddenly on no man ;" that 
so, by avoiding such rashness in exercising his power of 
ordination, he might not be a " partaker of other men's 
sins, but keep himself pure" from any such abuse of his 
authority. In tiiis apostolic charge, then, we see delineated, 
in the most accurate manner, all the particulars, in which 
bishops have been considered, since the days of the apos- 
tles, as superior to presbyters ; and he, who will not 
acknowledge Timothy to have been bishop at Ephesus, 



140 General Defence of Episcopacy. 

may as well deny, that there have ever been bishops in any 
part of the world, or that there are at present twenty-six of 
that order in England. 

But in answer to all this, our Lecturer holds up a part 
of St. Paul's account, and only one part of what the apostle 
says of Timothy's ordination. For — " in regard to the 
imposition of hands, which is considered," he says, " by 
manif^ (we would hope the Doctor himself was one of the 
many) " as a necessary attendant on ordination, we find 
this also attributed to the presbytery ;"* as to which, we 
are told, but without any proof, that " all Christian anti- 
quity concurs in affixing this name to what may be called 
the consistory of a particular church, or the college of its 
pastors :" therefore as Timothy was ordained by the laying 
on of the hands of this presbytery^ or college of pastors, it 
could not have been to the office of a bishop, in the proper 
ecclesiastical sense of the word, since, according to Dr. 
Campbell, no such office was known in the church at that 
time. Yet he acknowledges, that " this is the only passage 
in the New Testament, in which the Greek word for pres- 
bytery is applied to a Christian council ;" and if we may 
take the opinion of Qah'm^ as of equal weight with that, of 
many of his followers, on the subject of presbyterian or- 
dination, he expressly denies, that by the presbytery in this 
text, was meant a college of presbyters, and reads it, as 
if the apostle had said—" neglect not the gift of the office 
of a presbyter which was given thee by prophecy, with the 
laying on of hands." It has been thought by some, that as 
the apostles themselves were sometimes called elders or 
presbyters, therefore, a meeting of a certain number of 
them, for the ordination of Timothy, might properly enough 
be called the presbytery. But as St. Paul, in another 
place,']' speaks of himself as the sole ordainer of Timothy, 
so there is a difference of expression in the two accounts 

* 1 Tim. iv. 14. t 2 Tim. i. 6. 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 141 

which he gives of this matter; and from the one it appears 
that Timothy was ordained by the putting on of the apos-' 
de's hands, to convey authority; and from the other, that 
this was done with the laying on of the hands of the pres- 
bytery, as a testimony of their approbation.*^ Having al- 
ready admitted, that at the time when St. Paul wrote his 
several epistles, the elders or presbyters of the church were 
sometimes called bishops^ or overseers of what was com- 
mitted to their charge, we need hardly take notice of our 
Lecturer's " argument,f that there were but two orders of 
ministers then established, because Paul, in addressing the 
Philippians, expresses himself in this manner, — To all the 
saints at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons."f For if 
we should say, that they also had an apostle of their own, 
and, therefore, a bishop " in the proper and ecclesiastical 
sense of the word," it would be no more than what St. 
Paul said, when he told them, ^' I supposed it necessary to 
send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and companion in 
labour, and fellow soldier, but your apostle ;"§ on which 
Jerome observes-—" By degress, in process of time, others 
were ordained apostles^ by those whom our Lord had chosen, 
as that passage to the Philippians shows, ' I supposed it 
necessary to send unto you Epaphroditus your apostle ;" and 
Theodoret gives this reason why Epaphroditus is called 
the apostle of the Philippians — " He was entrusted with the 
Episcopal government, as being their bishop." The sanxe 



• The Greek preposition ^la, signifies the means by wliich the aq- 
tliority was conveyed: the other preposition ^(loc^ signifies no more than 
concurrence or approbation, such as is still given in the church of Eng- 
land, where the rubric directs, that " the bishop, with the priests present, 
shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth 
the order of priesthood. 

t Lecture iv. 

\ It should rather be rendered, " with bishops and deacons" — as the 
original has not the restrictive articles. 

§ Phil. ii. 25, where our translators have rendered it messenger. 



142 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 

Writer tells us,* " those now called bishops, were anciently 
called apostles ; but in process of time the name of apos- 
de was left to them who were truly apostles, and the name 
of bishop was restrained to those who were anciently called 
apostles : thus Epaphroditus was the apostle of the Philip- 
pians, Titus of the Cretians, and Timothy of the Asiatics*" 
— *Yet Dr. Campbell asserts, that " Theodoret was very 
much puzzledf where to find the origin of the office of bi- 
shop, as the word in his time implied, when he imagine^ 
he discovered it in a phrase, which occurs but once in the 
New Testament,"} where St. Paul mentions his brethren, 
as the apostles of the churches. For we know that Barna- 
bas, as well as Paul, was called an apostle^ and we have 
seen Epaphroditus expressly mentioned as the apostle of 
the Philippians, to whom Theodoret made no scruple to 
join Timothy and Titus, as the apostles of their respective 
churches in Ephesus and Crete. 

We have already taken notice of the Episcopal autho- 
rity, which was certainly committed to Timothy as Bishop 
pf the church at Ephesus ; the evidence is equally clear 
and irrefragable for that of Titus in Crete ; to the nature 
and design of whose commission, St. Paul refers in the 
plainest terms, when he tells him — " For this cause left I 
thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things 
that are wanting, and ordain elders or presbyters, in every 
city, as I had appointed thee."§ As the gospel was al- 
ready planted in Crete, it may be presumed, that some 
presbyters had been ordained in it likewise j in which case, 
if they had power to ordain others, there was no occasion 
to leave Titus there for the same purpose, as such an inva- 



* On 1 Tim. chap. iii. 

^ Not more puzzled than the Doctor himself was, where to find the 
origin of the power of his presbytery, when he was obliged to have re- 
course for it, to what he acknowledges to be the only passage in the 
New Testament, in which the word is applied to a Christian council. 

I 2 Cor. viii.23. § Titus i. 5. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 143 

sion of their office would have tended to promote strife and 
contention, rather than peace and good order. — But sup- 
posing that there were no presbyters in Crete, till Titus 
was left there for ordaining some ; yet when he had or- 
dained a few, he might have gone away and left them to 
** set in order every thing that was wanting ;" to carry on 
all future ordinations, and govern the church by their own 
authority. Yet, instead of this, in consequence of the 
Episcopal power which had been committed to him, he i^ 
directed by St. Paul, not only " to ordain presbyters in 
every city," but also to " rebuke with all authority, to ad- 
monish heretics," and in case of their obstinacy, to " re- 
ject" them from the communion of the church. In all 
these respects, it is evident that the authority of Titus in 
the church of Crete, was the same as that of Timothy in 
the church of Ephesus. The same caution is enjoined to 
both in the important affair of ordination, whether of pres- 
byters or deacons, and the same reason assigned for their 
being thus cautious, because " the^ bishop must be blame- 
less, — as the steward of God ;" and we know, it is a pecu- 
liar part of the steward's office to provide, inspect, and 
watch over the inferior servants of the family. 

When we now look back to the clear and distinct account, 
which is given of the Episcopal authority in the Epistles 
of St. Paul to Timothy and Titus, and see these distin- 
guished ministers of Christ exercising the power committed 
to them, for the edification and good government of the 
churches, over which they were appointed to preside, we 
cannot perceive any " species of vanity," far less any " evi- 
dent falsehood" in those postscripts subjoined to the epis- 
tles, which style Timothy and Titus " the first ordained 
bishops, the one of the church of the Ephesians, and the 
other of that of the Cretians." Neither are we at all stag- 



• Not a bishop, as our translators have rendered it, leaving out the re- 
strictive article. 



144 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

gered in our belief of the truth of these postscripts, by 
Dr, Campbell's asserting, that " Timothy and Titus were 
not made bishops till about five"^ hundred years after their 
death,"t when we find so much unexceptionable evidence 
to the contrary. 

But still our Lecturer insists, that they could " not be 
properly bishops, in the modern acceptation,'^ because the 
powers with which they were invested, were conferred 
upon them, not as bishops, or fixed governors, but in their 
extraordinary and temporary character of evangelists, I 
shall not say, that such a man as Dr. Campbell would bor- 
row this idea from writers of very inferior talents ; but 
nothing is more certain, than its being one of the most 
hackneyed topics, even in the meanest publications, which 
the two last centuries produced against the apostolic insti- 
tution of Episcopacy.J It is still more surprising, that 
such an idea should be adopted by the same author, who 
tells us, in another of his works, that the word from which 
the term evangelist is derived, " relates to the first infor-* 
mation that is given to a pei^son or people, that is, when 
the subject may be properly called news. Thus, in the 
Acts," he says, " it is frequently used for expressing the 
first publication of the gospel, in a city or a village, or 
amongst a particular people."|| Nay, in the very lecture 
now before us, he acknowledges, that the word " denotes 

* This word j?w, though not in the list of errata, has been said to be a 
mistake of the printer, and for Jive, it seems we should read tbree; which, 
to be sure, would lessen the error of the author a little as to the date, 
but could make no alteration, in our opinion, as to the Jiact, when we 
know so well that Timothy and Titus were certainl}- made bishops in 
their own lifetime, as well as evangelists. 

t Lecture v. 

I See Mr. Anderson's (of Dunbarton) Defence, &c. who affirms, as 
Dr. Campbell does, without any proof, that " Timothy and Titus were 
extraordz72ary officers, and, therefore, it cannot be thence inferred, that 
their superiority of power was designed to be perpetual." p. 104. 

II See the Preliminary Dissertations prefixed to his '* Translation- of 
th-e Gor,pe!s," p. 293. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 145 

properly, to preachy or declare the good news, that is, the 
gospel, to those who had before known nothing of the mat^ 
tef*"-' — It is evident then, that in his opinion, the disciples 
whom " Christ gave as evangelists, for the work of the 
uainistry," must have been the persons employed, whatever 
was their character or station, in communicating the know- 
ledge of the gospel to those to whom it was news^^ and who 
had never before heard of its glad tidings.-^But how could 
Timothy and Titus be considered as evangelhts^ in this sense 
of the word, to the churches of Ephesus and Crete, where 
St, Paul himself had been preaching the gospel, before 
they were empowered to take charge of these churches J 
aiid in that of EpheSus, there had been elders expressly 
p^rdained for taking heed to the flock committed to their 
pare, and feeding them vrith sound doctrine? It is true 
Ithat Timothy was directed by St. Paul to do the work of 
an e'oang'eiist^ or preacher of the gospel ; but a preaching' 
apostle or bishop was no such extraordinary character as to 
jbe inve&ted, merely on that account, with a pre-eminence 
0\'er the other overseers of the church at Ephesus. If it 
was not then as evangelists^ that Timothy and Titus were 
entrusted with the inspection and government of the Ephe* 
sian and Gretian churches, it must have been as persons^ 
in whom the apostolic commission was continued, with all 
the ordinary powers which were necessary for answering 
the purpose of that important commission. 

But it has been pretended, by those who oppose the 
continuance of such an apostolic commission in the way 
of Episcopal succession, that the apostles themselves were 
ministers of the same extraordinary character as these evan- 
gelists, whose office was not to be continued any longer 
than the first publication of the gospel required. Follow- 
ing his predecessors in this beaten tract, Dr. Campbell has 
affirmed, that " the apostolate itself was one of those extra- 
ordinary offices which were in their nature temporary, 
and did not admit succession:" in support of which very 

19 



ft 



146 General Defence of Episcopacy i 

bold^ if not extraordinary assertion, he brings forward se- 
veral arguments, to which the " attention of his hearers is 
entreated."* First — he refers them for the character of 
an apostle, to the brief description given of it by St. Peter, 
as sufficient to show, that the office could be but temporary, 
and could have no existence after the extinction of that 
generation. The words which are supposed to show the 
*' absurdity, as well as arrogance of modem pretenders,"'!* 
are those made use of, on occasion of the election of 
Matthias into the place of the traitor Judas, when Peter 
said — " Whetefore, of these nien, which have companied 
with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out 
among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto the 
same day that he was taken up from us, must one be 
ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." J Is 
it possible, that our learned Lecturer could infer from these 
words, that the essence of the apostolic character consisted 
in "having seen Jesus Christ in the flesh after his resurrec- 
tion," — when we are assured, " that he Was seen in the 
flesh of above five hundred brethren at once, after he rose 
from the dead," though at that time there were only eleven 
apostles ?-^ And if he had requested the attention of his 
pupils to the nature of that commission, which these eleven 
received from their Lord and Master, with the promise 
subjoined to it, that he was to be with them always, even 
unto the end of the world, it must have been no easy mat- 
ter, we should suppose, to convince those who firmly 
believed the truth of this promise, that the eleven apostles 
could have no successors, and their commission *' no exist- 
ence after the extinction of that generation." 

His second argument, in support of this opinion, is laid 
down in these words — " The apostles were distinguished 
by prerogatives, which did not descend to any after them. 
Of this kind were — ^their receiving their mission immedi- 

* Lecture v. f Ibid. + Acts i. 21, 22. 



General Defence of Episcopacy. 14/ 

ately from the Lord Jesus Christ, — ^the power of confer- 
ring, by imposition of hands, the miraculous gifts of the 
spirit, on whomsoever they would — and the knowledge 
they had, by inspiration, of the whole doctrine of Christ."* 
But if these " prerogatives did not descend to any after 
them," it was not because they constituted any essential 
part of the apostolic office, but only as they were qualifica- 
tions peculiarly necessary for the discharge of that office, 
in laying the foundation of the Christian church, and pro- 
pagating the Christian doctrine throughout the world. It 
was, no doubt, absolutely necessary, that the first apostles 
of the Christian church should " receive their mission im- 
mediately from Christ himself," because there was none 
else from whom they could receive it. But the same 
necessity could not be said to exist, when they, having once 
been " sent by Christ, even as the Father had sent him," 
had thereby received power to continue that mission in 
such a way, as that it might be regularly handed down to 
the end of the world. As to the miraculous powers, and 
inspired knowledge of divine truth, with which the eleven 
apostles were endued in such an eminent degree, it does 
not appear, that these marks of distinction, except perhaps 
in that eminence of degree, were peculiar to them ; since 
we read of many others, who possessed the same power of 
working miracles, and the same extraordinary gifts of the 
spirit. The seven deacons were all " men full of the Holy 
Ghost, and wisdom j" and it is particularly mentioned of 
one of them, that " he did great wonders and miracles 
among the people," and that his adversaries " were not 
able to resist the wisdom, and the spirit, by which he 
spake,""!* It is evident then, that the apostolic office did 
not consist in the possession of these extraordinary privi- 
leges, which, at the first setting out of the gospel, for the 
sake of giving power and progress to it, were bestowed on 

* I^ecture v. t Acts vi. 8 — 10- 



i4<l General t>efenc6 of J^phcopetcy. 

many others of inferior stations in the church.— These 
could not possibly preclude the apostles from having suc- 
cessors in that superior office, which, for answering all the 
Ordinar}^ purposes intended by it, was to be continued as 
long as the church itself should exist upon earth. 

Yet our Lecturer gives it, as his third argument against 
Such an apostolic succession, that " the mission of th6 
apostles was of quite a different kind from that of any ordi- 
fiary pastor. It was to propagate the gospel throughout 
the World, both among Jews and pagans, and not to take 
the charge of a particular flock. The terms of their con^- 
mission are, Go and teach all nations : Again, Go ye into 
all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. No 
doubt they may be styled bishops or overseers, but in a 
sense very different from that in which it is applied to the 
inspector over the inhabitants of a particular district.— 
They were universal bishops ; the whole church, or rather 
the whole earth, was their charge, and they were all col- 
leagues one of another."* All this perhaps is true with 
tespect to the general nature of their commission, although 
they might find it convenient, if not necessary, to assign to 
each a particular portion of the charge committed to them. 
It was the current report of antiquity, that they divided 
the earth among them ; and to some such division, St. Paul 
seems to allude, where he says-—" When James, Cephasj 
and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace 
that v/as given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the 
light hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the hea- 
then, and they unto the circumcision."f The same St. 
Paul, who though not of the eleven^ is yet acknowledged, 
as well as Matthias, to have been an apostle, assures us, 
that " he so strove to preach the gospel, not where Christ 
was named, lest he should build upon another man's foun- 
dation :"J And we have every reason to believe, that thr 

* Lecture v. f ^^^' »• 9. | Roj-n. xv. 20? 



Seneral Defence of Ephcopaty^ 149 

other apostles conducted themselves in the same regular 
and orderly manner* No — says our Professor — " If they 
|iad limited themselves to any thing less than the world, 
it would have been disobedience to the express command 
they had received from their Master, to go into all nations, 
and to preach the gospel to every creature." But surely 
the obedience which they owed to this command, did not 
require that every individual among them should actually 
go into all nations ; and that the gospel should be preached 
to every creature, by each of the eleven apostles, to whom 
the command was given. It was enough, that no nation 
was omitted, no creature neglected, by the apostles in 
general, but that, as St. Paul says of them, " their sound 
went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of 
world."* But when this was accomplished by their com- 
mon and united efforts, there was nothing to hinder them 
from exercising their apostolic authority over the churches, 
which they had respectively planted, till they should find 
proper persons, or " faithful men,"t as St. Paul calls tiiem, 
on whom they might devolve the same authority, with 
power to transmit it from age to age, or in the words of 
(heir Lord's promise^-*" even unto the end of world." 

As another objection, however, to this plan of apostolic 
succession, our Lecturer brings forward his fourth and last 
argument, which he states in these words — *" As a full 
proof that the matter was thus universally understood, both 
in their own age and in the times immediately succeeding, 
no one, on the death of an apostle, was ever substituted in 
his room ; and when that original sacred college was extinct, 
the title became extinct with it."J But what signifies the 
extinction of the title ? Might not the same official powers 
be continued under different titles ? To take another simili- 
tude from temporal things ; are we not accustomed to hear 
of the supreme civil pov/er being enjoyed in one country 

* Roni. X. IS. f 2 Tim. ii. 2. % Lecture v. 



150 General Defence of Episcopacy. 

by a King^ in another by an Emperor^ and in a third, very 
lately, by a First Consul; while each of these titles denotes 
a person possessed of supreme, and therefore very similar 
authority ? Dr. Campbell could not but know the reason 
why, as well as the time when, the title of apostle was laid 
aside, and that of bishop substituted in its place. Though 
he had quoted Theodoret, to expose the folly of his imagin- 
ing those to be bishops whom St. Paul described as " the 
apostles of the churches," he should yet have recollected, 
that the same Theodoret mentions their successors, as 
humbly abstaining from the name of apostles, and con- 
tenting themselves with that of bishops ; a title expressive 
of the care, attention and vigilance, which their office re- 
quired. — To what purpose then was our author's remark, 
that " on the death of an apostle, no one was ever substi'- 
tuted in his room," if by no one he means no apostle? 
And that this was his meaning, is evident from the pains he 
has taken to show, that neither " the election of Matthias 
by the apostles, nor the subsequent admission of Paul and 
Barnabas to the apostleship, formed any exception to what 
had been advanced ; for they came not as successors to any 
one, but were specially called by the Holy Spirit as apostles, 
particularly to the Gentiles."* And if they came with 
apostolical powers, we are ready to admit, that it is of no 
consequence whether " they came as successors to any. 
one" or not ; since the point in question is not, whether 
there should be now just twelve bishops in the whole Chris- 
tian church, and each of them able to trace his succession 
from some individual apostle ; but whether in that portion 
of every regularly constituted church called a diocese, there 
always has been, from the days of the apostles to the pre- 
sent time, some ecclesiastical person, so far possessed of 
the apostolic commission and character, as to have autho-r 
rity to ordain and superintend the presbyters and deacon^ 



* Lecture v. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, \5i 

tuider his spiritual jurisdiction, and to assist in preserving 
and continuing his own Episcopal order, as also in what- 
ever else is necessary to the care and good government of 
the particular national church to which he belongs ? Now, 
the admission of Paul and Barnabas to the office of apostles, 
after the number twelve was completed, settles this point, 
so far as it proves, that the apostolic office was not limited 
to those " who companied with the eleven all the time that 
the Lord Jesus went in and out among them," and, there- 
fore, was not such as necessarily " became extinct," when, 
as our Lecturer expresses himself — " that original sacred 
college was extinct." — On the contrary, we see an addition 
made to it in the case now before us ; and though he tells 
us that " Paul and Barnabas were specially called by the 
Holy Spirit as apostles," thereby making a distinction, and 
marking a difference, as it were, between their apostleship, 
and that which, he had said, was " received immediately 
from the Lord jfesus Christ^'* yet St. Paul himself, who 
best knew how this matter stood, assures us, that "he was 
an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, 
and God the Father;"* which not only points to the man- 
ner in which he himself was called to the apostleship by 
the Lord Jesus Christy but at the same time clearly shows, 
that when he wrote his Epistle to the Galatians, there were 
in the church, apostles, who had been ordained to their 
office by the ministry of man. Such, we have seen, was 
Epaphroditus, whom St. Paul calls the apostle of the Phi- 
lippians.t Such, undoubtedly, were Timothy and Titus, 
and those brethren who are distinguished as " apostles of 
the churches, the glory of Christ."f 

* Gal. i. 1. 

f Dr. Campbell's man of discernment— Hilary the deacon, in his 
Commentary on the second chapter of the Ep stie to the Philippians, 
says expressly, that Epaphroditus was constituted their apostle by St. 
Paul himself: His words arc, " Erat enim eorum apostolus, ab apostolo 
factus." 

I 2 Cor. viii. 23. 



142 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 

Where then could our Lecturer have learned, dr how 
could he pretend to teach his pupils, that the apostolioil 
office, founded on the commission given by our Lord to 
the eleven apostles, " was one of those extraordinarv of- 
fices, which were in their nature temporary, and did not 
admit succession ?" There was a school, in which this 
lesson was taught, but from which we can hardly suppose 
that such a man as Dr. Campbell would have imbibed the 
sentiments he has avowed on this subject. Yet, when we 
observe one of the most strenuous advocates for the papal 
supremacy positively asserting, that " bishops are not pro- 
perly the successors of the apostles, because the apostles 
were not ordinary, but extraordinary pastors, such as, from 
the nature of their delegation, could have no successors,"^ 
we cannot easily refrain from expressing our surprise at 
such a striking coincidence in opinion, between the popish 
cardinal, and the presbyterian professor ; and from this, 
and other instances of a similar nature, we might be in- 
clined to suspect, that between popery and presbytery, the 
difference, in many things, is not so great as is generally 
imagined. 

From considering the nature of the apostolic office, as 
admitting no succession, and the peculiar business of the 
other extraordinary ministers called evangelists, as exem- 
plified in Timothy and Titus, our author passes, by a na- 
tural transition, to what he terms, the " only one other plea 
of any consequence in favour of the apostolical antiquity of 

* See Cardinal Bellarmine — ^De Rom. Pont. lib. iv. cap. 24 — whose 
v/ords are these — " Episcopi non succedunt propria apostolis, quoniam 
apostoli non fuerunt ordinarii, sed extraordinarii, et quasi delegati pas- 
tores quibus non succeditur." To this authority Mr» Anderson, of Dun- 
barton, seems to have referred, when, combating the argument in favour 
of Episcopacy, drawn from a succession in the apostolate, he observed 
— " The church of Rome, a society of a very large extent, of a long 
&tandin.g, and such as has produced not a few wise and great men, ex- 
pressly contradict it, denying that any of the apostles had supcessors, 
cave Peter, in the papal chair." See his Defencf^., &c. p. 90. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 153 

Episcopacy ; and which he reserved for the last, because 
it affords an excellent handle for inquiring into the real 
origin of subordination among the Christian pastors. The 
plea he means is taken from the Epistles to the seven 
Asian churches in the apocalypse, addressed to the angels 
of these churches severally, and in the singular number ; 
to the angel of the church of Ephesus, and so of the rest."* 
At his first setting out on this inquiry, he seems at a loss 
%vhat account to give of the peculiar mode of address 
made use of in these Epistles, but is extremely unwilling 
to acknowledge that any inference can be drawn from it 
in favour of Diocesan Episcopacy. This, he thinks, would 
be contrary to every just rule of interpretation ; and yet 
he appears to be equally dissatisfied with what he says is 
" maintained by some zealous patrons of the Presbyterian 
model," that by the angel is meant, according to the allego- 
rical style, that consistory of elders, called the Preshijtery^ 
which, the better to show the union that ought to subsist 
among the members, is here emphatically considered and 
addressed as one person. Between these two interpreta- 
tions, which have respectively distinguished the Episcopa- 
lian and the Presbyterian party, he chooses to steer a mid- 
dle course, and to adopt, what he calls an intermediate opi- 
nion, as appearing to him much more probable than either 
of the other two. " His sentiment, therefore, is, that, as in 
their consistories and congregations, it would be necessary, 
for the sake of order, that one should preside, both in the 
offices of religion, and in their consultations for the com- 
mon good, it is their president or chairman, that is here ad- 
dressed under the name of angel."-— This opinion he af- 
terwards illustrates, by comparing his chairman to the 
" speaker of the House of Commons, and to the prolocutor 
of either house of convocation in England, or the modera- 
tor of an ecclesiastical judicator}^ in Scotland." The first 

* Lecture v. 
20 



1 54 General Defence of Episcopacy t 

of these comparisons is rather unlucky, as the appointment 
of the speaker depends on the will of the Sovereign, and, 
therefore, implies the acknowledgment of a superior : And 
the other two offices, being of a temporary nature, were not 
properly adapted to the design of his comparison, unless 
he had, or could have shown, that these apocalyptic bishops 
ever descended from their station, and became common 
members of the presbytery, as he knew to be always the 
case with his moderators. 

It is indeed true, that the epistles addressed to the angels 
mentioned in the first three chapters of the book of the 
Revelation of St» John, were intended for the use of those 
churches, of which these angels are represented as the 
directors and governors. There can be no ground to sup- 
pose that the churches themselves were meant by the an- 
gels, when the distinction between them is so plainly laid 
down in these words, as descriptive of the mystery: — " The 
seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the 
seven candlesticks, which thou sawest, are the seven 
churches."^ Both being thus distinguished by their proper 
emblems, the angels could not be the churches, nor any 
select number, or collective body of men, because they are 
constantly mentioned as single persons, and by a title, 
which was well known to bear the same meaning as that of 
apostle. Both are applied to signify a messenger of God : 
an apostle as one sent or commissioned to carry his mes- 
sage, an angel as employed in telling or declaring that mes- 
sage. The name of angel, therefore, was very properly 
applied to those who immediately succeeded the apostles, 
in their office of preaching or publishing God's will to the 
church ; and when St. Paul was employed in preaching the 
gospel to the Galatians, he says, " they received him as an 
angel of God."']* This plainly shows that these angels were 
not only single persons, but entrusted also with the care 

* Rev. i. 20. t Gal. iv. 14. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 155 

aiid government of the several churches, of which they 
were called the angels: which will still appear more clearly, 
if we consider the subject of the Epistles addressed to them, 
and the characters, which are there given of them. On 
account of the authority committed to them, we find them 
praised for all the good, and blamed for all the evil, which 
happened in their churches.— The angel of the church of 
Ephesus is commended, because " he could not bear them 
that were evil, and had tried those who said they were 
apostles, and were not so." Having called them to ac- 
count, and examined their pretentions, he found them to 
be no other than " liars," and impostors, and therefore 
executed the discipline of the church against them ; in doing 
which, he receives approbation for discharging his duty. 
The ,angel of the church in Pergamos is reproved for not 
severely censuring, as they deserved, those who were 
guilty of wicked and idolatrous practices; from which it is 
evident, that he had authority to correct such disorders. 
And the same may be said of the angel of Thyatira, who 
is blamed for " suffering Jezebel, who called herself a pro- 
phetess, to teach and seduce the servants of Christ," and 
so lead them into the basest idolatry. The angel of Sardis 
is commanded to be " watchful, and to strengthen those 
who were ready to die ;" otherwise our Lord threatens to 
*' come on him as a thief, and at an hour which he should 
not know ;" plainly alluding to what he had formerly said 
to those " stewards, whom he had made rulers over his 
household, to give them their meat in due season." 

All this is abundantly sufficient to show the office, station 
and authority of the angels of the seven churches, and that 
we need not scruple to call them, with St. Augustine, and 
other ancient fathers, " the bishops and presidents of these 
churches."* If they had not been clothed with that cha- 

* See this matter fully handled in An History of the Government of the 
Primitive Church) ^c. by Fr^vncis Brokesby, B. D. of Cambridge, and 



156 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

racter, it would be difficult to reconcile the charges given 
to them by St. John in the name of Christ, with that princi- 
ple of equity, by which we are sure all the divine proceed- 
ings ever have been and always will be guided. If the an- 
gels of the Asiatic churches had been invested with no more 
permanent power than what is committed to the moderator 
of a presbytery under the Scotch establishment, it would 
have been hard indeed to require more of them than their 
office allowed them to perform, or to condemn them for not 
doing what they had no right or authority to do. This 
would be considered as such flagrant severity and injustice 
in any human judicatory, that we cannot possibly suppose 
the most distant tendency towards it, in his divine admi- 
nistration, who is King of kings, and Lord of lords, and 
as " Judge of all the earth, will certainly do right." But 
if the angels addressed by St. John had really the same 
authority over the seven churches of Asia that was com- 
mitted to Timothy and Titus, in those of Ephesus and 
Crete : if these angels, apostles, or bishops, had each of 
them a right, in virtue of his apostolic commission, to take 
cognizance of false and heretical doctrine, to admonish the 
heretic, and in case of his obstinate contempt of such ad- 
monition, to reject him from the communion of the church: 
if to these angels only pertained the power of ordaining 
presbyters and deacons in the several churches committed 
to their care, and when ordained, of appointing their ser- 
vices, inspecting their conduct, and seeing that every thing 
was done decently, and so as to promote order and edifi- 
cation : If such were the Episcopal powers committed to 
these angels of the Asiatic churches, which, we have already 
seen, had been committed to Timothy in Ephesus, and 

in A Discourse of Church Govenionent, ijfc. by Dr. Potter, who has shown, 
from the most early accounts of the primitive church, that bishops were 
settled in all the seven churches of the Proconsular Asia, of which Ephe- 
sus was the metropolis, at or near the time when these Epistles were 
written by St. John, and sent to the angels, or bishops, of these churches. 



General Defence of Episcopacy . 157 

Titus in Crete, the careful performance of the duties aris- 
ing from such an important trust would, no doubt, procure 
the praise of their heavenly Master ; while inattention and 
negligence, neither reproving what was wrong, nor rebuk- 
ing the wicked, nor expelling the incorrigible, would as 
certainly expose them to the just reprehension of that 
divine Lord, who had employed his servant John thus to 
point out their duty, and do the same good office to the 
bishops of the seven churches in Asia, that St. Paul had 
done before to those of Ephesus and Crete. 

Our Lecturer, indeed, after all he had said to show the 
resemblance between St. John's bishops in Asia, and his 
own moderators in Scotland, acknowledges, that his opi- 
nion " is only the most likely conjecture of all he has seen 
on this article, which, he owns, does not admit so positive 
a proof as might be wished." And yet, from proof so im- 
perfect, and evidence merely conjectural, he infers, without 
the least hesitation, that " it was doubtless the distinction of 
one pastor in every church, marked by this apostle, though 
not made by any who had written before him, which has led 
Tertuilian, whose publications first appeared but about a 
century after the apostles, to consider him as the institutor 
of Episcopacy."* To prove that this was TertuUian's opi- 
nion, his words are quoted in Latin, with the translation 
given of them by Bingham, in his Antiquities of the Chris- 
tian Church^ which is called " a palpable misinterpretation 
of our antiquary," as by this version, according to our au- 
thor, " Bingham avoids showing, what is extremely plain 
from the words, that Tertuilian did not think there was 
any subordination in the pastors of the churches instituted 
by the other apostles."f But this, perhaps, would not 

* Lecture v. t Book II chap. i. § S. 

:j: TertuUian's words are, as taken by themselves in Dr. Campbell's 
quotation, " Ordo tamen Episcoporum ad originem recensus in Joannem 
stabit auctorem:" (lib. iv. adv. Marcionem) which Bingham translates 
thus : ** The order of bishops, when it is traced up to its original, will 



158 General Defence of Episcopacy 

have appeared so " extremely plain" as Dr. Campbell 
thought it, had he not omitted the first clause of the sen- 
tence, with which the words he has quoted have a neces- 
sary and evident connection. In his controversy with 
Marcion, who rejected part of the New Testament canon, 
TertuUian had been proving the novelty of this heretic's 
opinions, from his being unable to show any church that 
embraced them, which could deduce its original by a de- 
scent of bishops from the apostles ; which was evidently 
the case with those churches, in which the sound apostolic 
doctrine was still retained. For " let us see," says he, 
" what milk the Corinthians drew from Paul, by what rule 
the Galatians were reclaimed, what the Philippians, Thes- 
salonians and Ephesians read, what, likewise, our neigh- 
bour Romans say, to whom both Peter and Paul left the 
gospel sealed with their blood. — >»We have also churches 
founded by John,* for though Marcion rejects his apoca- 

be found to have St. John for one of its authors." This Dr. CampbelJ 
proves to be a ** palpable misinterpretation," by the following argument. 
Had Tertullian said — " Mundus ad originem recensus, in Deum stabit. 
creatorem," would Bingham have rendered it — " The world, when it 
is traced up to its original, will be found to have God for one of its crea- 
tors ? I cannot allow myself to think it. Yet the interpolation, in ren- 
dering creatorem one of its creators, is not more flagrant than in render- 
ing auctorem one of its authors." This reflection we cannot help think- 
ing too severe, if not Jiagrantly unjust. For Bingham knew well, that 
Tertullian did not allow colleagues to God, as creator of the world; but 
that he very well might assign, and had actually assigned colleagues to 
John, as author of Episcopacy. And as the Latin language has no re- 
strictive article, we must be regulated by the context, in rendering aucto- 
rem either an author, thereby with Bingham admitting other authors, 
or the author, with Dr. Campbell, thereby restricting the sense to one, 
which certainly was not TertuUian's meaning, as is evident from the 
connection of this quotation with the preceding part of the passage 
from which it is taken. 

* Habemus et Joannis alumnas ecclesias: Nam etsi apocalypsim ejus 
Marcion respuit, ordo tamen Episcoporum ad originem recensus, in Joan- 
nem stabit auctorem ; where the word tamen evidently shows that the 
passage must have a connection with what goes immediately before. 



General Defence of Episcopacy. 1 59 

iypse, yet the order or succession of bishops in these 
churches, when traced up to its original, will be found to 
have John for its author," as being the ordainer of the first 
bishops in the churches which he had planted. 

This, though a kind of paraphrase of his words, is 
evidently TertuUian's meaning, and agrees exactly with 
what he says on the same subject in another of his works, 
which we have already had occasion to mention, his " Pre- 
scriptions against Heretics," where he challenges them to 
" produce the originals of their churches, and show the 
order of their bishops so running down successively from 
the beginning, as that every first bishop among them, shall 
have had for his author and predecessor, some one of the 
apostles, or apostolic men, who continued with the apostles. 
For in this manner the apostolic churches bring down 
their registers ; as the church of Smyrna from Polycarp 
placed there by John, the church of Rome from Clement 
ordained by Peter ; and so do the rest prove their apostolic 
original, by exhibiting those who were constituted their 
bishops by the apostles."^ Here we see not only Tertul- 
lian mentioning the circumstance of Peter ordaining Cle- 
ment at Rome, as well as John placing Polycarp at Smynia, 
both of whom have been always called bishops ; but that 
the rest of the churches also had bishops constituted by the 
apostles ; and he expressly gives the ver}^ appellation of 
"author" to every apostle, or apostolic man, who had founded 
churches any where. Had Dr. Campbell acted fairly with 
his " young friends, whom he had just before been warn- 

* TertuUian's words are these : " Edant ergo origenes ecclesiarum 
suarum ; evolvant ordinem Episcoporum suorum ita per successlones ab 
initio decurrentem, ut primus ille Episcopus aliquem ex apostolis, veL 
apostolicis viris, qui tamen cum apostolis perseveraverint, habuerit auc- 
torern, et antecessorem ; hoc enim modo ecclesise apostolicx census suos 
deferunt, sicut Smyrnaeorum ecclesia habens Polycarpuni ab Joanne con- 
locatum refert.; sicut Romanorum Clementem a Petro ordinatum edit : 
proinde utique et ceterae exhibent, quos ab apostolis in Episcopatum con- 
stitutos, apostolici seminis traduces habeant." De praescript. C. 32. 



160 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

ing to revere truth above all things, wherever they found 
it, and be always open to conviction," he would have laid 
before them this passage, which I have now quoted, as 
well as the other, and left them to determine for them- 
selves, without " prejudice or prepossession, whether there 
was any good ground to conclude, that Tertullian " consi- 
dered the apostle John as the institutor of Episcopacy.'^ 
And yet, had the case been really so, the cause of Episco- 
pacy could have received no harm from it, when we find 
even this learned adversary acknowledging it to be " more 
likely, that John, in the direction of the Epistles to the 
seven churches, availed himself of a distinction, which 
had subsisted from the beginning, than that either the 
church was new-modelled by this apostle, or that the dif- 
ferent apostles adopted different plans."'^ This last suppo- 
sition, indeed, appears to us so very unlikely, we might even 
say incredible, that we have no scruple to rest the institu- 
tion of Episcopacy on the ground which is here assigned 
to it ; because we are certain that all the apostles modelled 
the church on one and the same plan, even on the plan of 
that distinction^ which had subsisted from the beginning, 
and always " implied" that very " difference in order and 
power," which our Professor was so unwilling to acknow- 
ledge, and laboured so earnestly to make his pupils disbe- 
lieve. 

In the course of these labours, we have now followed 
him through such of his lectures as seem to have more 
immediate reference to the authority of scripture, in ascer- 
taining the original constitution and government of the 
Christian church: a subject on which the inspired writers 
give us as much clear information as is perfectly sufficient 
to guide us aright, if we will be directed by it in this in- 
quiry; and " from which," it is our opinion, " that we can 
with certainty form a judgment concerning the entire 

* Lecture v. 



General Defence of Episcopacy i 161 

model of the apostolic church." Dr. Campbell, however, 
thinks otherwise, and represents those passages of scrip- 
ture which have a reference to this important subject, in a 
light very different from that in which the friends of Epis- 
copacy have been taught to view them. To whom then 
shall we have recourse, as most likely to point out where 
the truth lies between such jarring opinions ? To whom 
indeed can we apply for direction in judging of a matter 
of fact, such as the apostolic constitution of the church, 
but to those contemporary or" early writers, who, " as to 
what depends on testimony^'* in explaining any part of 
scripture which is thought to be doubtful, " are in every 
case, wherein no particular passion can be suspected to have 
swayed them, to be preferred before modem interpreters or 
annotators ?" This is the account which, in a work pub- 
Hshed by himself,* Dr. Campbell gives of the credit that 
is due to those who are called the fathers of the church ; 
and then he adds—*" I say not this, to insinuate that we 
can rely more on their integrity, but to signify, that with 
them many points were a subject of testimony^ which, with 
modem critics, are matter merely of conjecture^ or, at most, 
of abstruse and critical discussion. And every body must 
be sensible, that the direct testimony of a plain man, in a 
matter which comes within the sphere of his knowledge, is 
more to be regarded than the subtile conjectures of an able 
scholar, who does not speak from knowledge, but gives the 
conclusions he has drawn from his own precarious reason- 
ings, or from those of others." 

After such a concession in favour of the fathers, limited 
as it is in some points, we shall most readily listen to their 
evidence in the case befoi-e us, being well assured, that 
the government of the church under which they lived, was 
a matter that " came within the sphere of their knowledge," 
and that we cannot possibly suspect all the Christian wri- 

* See his Preliminary Dissertations, 8tc. p, 106, 107. 
> 21 



162 General Defence of Episcopacy * 

ters of that character, to have been " swayed by any pafti-^ 
cular passion," to give a false account of what must have 
been generally well known, and in a case where the false- 
hood could have been so easily detected. 

The first of these " ancient testimonies," which our Lec- 
turer brings forward, is taken, he says, " from the most re- 
spectable remains we have of Christian antiquity, next to the 
inspired writings ;" and then adds,* "The piece I allude to 
is the first Epistle of Clemens Romanus to the Corinthians, 
as it is commonly stvled, but as it st}des itself, the Epistle 
of the church of God at Rome, to the church of God at 
Corinth :" — From which inscription of the epistle, Dr» 
Campbell would no doubt infer, as Blondel had done before 
him,f that at the time when it was written, both the church 
ef Rome and that of Corinth were governed by a college 
of presbyters, or rather by the people at large ; since the 
whole church at Rome wrote to the whole church at 
Corinth, without making any distinction between clergy 
and laity. — Yet Blondel could not but know, that such a 
distinction is expressly mentioned in the epistle itself ; and 
his follower, Dr. Campbell, is at no small pains to show, that 
the passage in which it is so mentioned, being " introduced 
by Clemens, when speaking of the Jewish priesthood, and 
not of the Christian ministry, affords no foundation for the 
distinction that was long after his time introduced." How 
far this reasoning is just, will appear from considering the 
purpose, for which the Jewish priesthood is spoken of on 
this occasion, and the situation of those on whom St. Cle- 
ment thus presses the necessity of ecclesiastical subordina- 
tion. 



* Lecture iv. 

f Yet Blondel acknowledges that this very Clement was generally be- 
lieved to have been the second bishop after St. Peter in the church of 
Rome. — His words are, " Plerique Latinorum (Hieronymo teste) secun- 
dum post Petrum fuisse putaverunt, ut ante annum domini 65 ad Komanx 
eccks^a: cUvuni sedisss neces^e sit." Apologia pro Sent. Hieron. p. 9. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 6a 

A fresh spirit of schism and division had broke out in the 
church at Corinth, similar to that which St. Paul was 
obliged to repress, when he wrote his first Epistle to the 
Corinthians: And now his fellow labourer, St. Clement, 
making use of some of the powerful arguments which the 
apostle had formerly urged, brings the matter home to the 
point in question, by showing how the members of the 
church at Corinth ought all to conduct themselves in a 
quiet and peaceable manner, each within his proper station ; 
thus humbly imitating the order and harmony which pre- 
vailed in the Jewish church, the instituted type or figure of 
the church of Christ. '^ Seeing then," says St. Clement/ 
that " these things are manifest unto us, it will behove 
us to take care, that looking into the depths of the divine 
knowledge, we do all things in order, whatsoever our Lord 
has commanded us'to do ; and particularly, that we perform 
our offerings and service to God, at their appointed seasons 
— and by the persons that minister unto him. For the 
chief priest has his proper services, and to the priests 
their proper place is appointed, and to the Levites belong 
their proper ministrations (or deaconships), and the layman 
is confined within the bounds of what is commanded to 
laymen. Let every one of you, brethren, bless God in his 
proper station, not exceeding the rule that is appointed to 
him." When we consider the scope and design of this 
passage, we must be convinced, that though the venerable 
writer is speaking of the economy of the Jewish church, it 
is only in the way of allusion, and for drawing the neces- 
sary inference, with regard to the Christian ministry. But 
neither the allusion would have been proper, nor the infer- 
ence just, if the distinctions of ecclesiastical order in the 
Christian church had not corresponded to those in the 
Jewish, as they are here described by St. Clement, for the 
sake of pointing out the resemblance, and showing the 
proper conclusion which was to be drawn from it. 
Yet our Professor endeavours to make this ancient author 



1 64 General Defence of Episcopacy* • 

contradict himself, by quoting a passage from liim, in 
which, as he thinks, the orders of the Christian ministry- 
are represented as but two, and so not the same in number 
with those of the Jewish. It was for the same purpose 
that Blondel made use of this passage, in which St. Cle- 
ment says — ^that " the apostles having preached the gospel 
through countries and cities, constituted the first fruits- 
of their conversions, whom they approved by the spirit, 
bishops and deacons of those who should believe :" From 
which words it is inferred, that the apostles, in planting 
churches through countries and cities, ordained but two 
orders to take care of them.^ And may it not then be 
asked, v^hat were the ordainers themselves f Were they 
of no order in the church ? Or were they of the same; 
order with either of these whom they ordained ? From 
the answer that must be given to these question, it is evi- 
dent that there were three orders in the church, at the time 
when the apostles ordained the two inferior orders, whom 
St. Clement, in the current language of the apostolic age, 
calls bishops and deacons, and thereby alludes to a text, 
which he iuotes from Isaiah,f as rendered in the Greek 
translation—r." I will constitute their bishops in righteous- 
ness, and their deacons in faith." Whether this be a just 
translation, or a proper application of the prediction, Dr, 
Campbell acknowledges is not the question.-^" It is 
enough," he says, " that it evinces what Clement's notion 
was of the established ministers then in the chut*ch." And 
his notion, we have no doubt, was the same with what we 
have seen prevailed at the time when he wrote this Epistle 
to the Corinthians; that under the apostles, the care or 

* See the same inference drawn, and the very same reasoning made 
use of to support it, in An Enquiry into the Co7istitution, Ijfc. of the Primi- 
tive Church, which was so completely answered in An Original Draught 
of the Primitive Church, by a presbyter of the church of England, tha,t 
it is said to have brought over the Enquirer to this author's opinion. 

t Isaiah Ix. 17. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 65 

oversight of certain portions of the flock of Christ was 
committed to inferior overseers and ministers, whom we 
have called bishops and deacons, till it was thought proper 
to put them under the government of persons invested 
with apostolical power, such as Clemens himself possessed 
and exercised in the church of Rome, of which he is al- 
ways distinguished as bishops and by another writer of the 
same name, Clemens of Alexandria, is expressly called 
the " apostle Clemens."^ This is all that can be justly in- 
ferred from the passage of his epistle, quoted by Dr. Camp- 
bell; which was not at all intended to point out particularly 
the number of orders in the church ; and could no more 
be considered as setting aside the superior rank and autho- 
rity of bishops, than the common language of both Jewish 
and Christian writers could be understood as excluding the 
high priest, when they mentioned the Jewish ministry 
under the general appellation of priests and Levites.'j' 

The next testimony which our author produces, to show 
that, in the primitive times, there were only two orders of 
ministers in the church, is that of Polycarp, bishop of 
Smyrna, who is said by Irenseus to have been taught by the 
apostles, and to have conversed with many, who had seen 
our Saviour; to which account it is added, that Irensus 
himself had seen him, in his younger days, and knew him 
to have been constituted bishop of Smyrna by the apostles. 
One might suppose, that when the adversaries of Episco- 
pacy bring forward such a witness as this in support of 
their cause, they had certainly discovered in his writings, 
some clear, undoubted evidence, on which might be justly 
founded the irrejection of the Episcopal order. But, in- 

* Strom, lib. iv. 

t In some parts of the English liturgy the clergy are prayed for undev 
the twofold distinction of " bishops and curates" But no person will 
hence infer, that the church of England has but tvio orders of clergy, 
when she has so carefully provided for the " making, ordaining and 
consecrating of bishops, priests, and deacons'* 



166 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 

stead of this, all that we meet with in his Epistle to the 
Philippians, is a very brief intimation of " their being sub- 
ject to the presbyters and deacons, as unto God and Christ ; 
while, at the same time, the very introduction to the epistle 
marks the superior character of the writer, in these words 
— " Polycarp, and the presbyters that are with him, to the 
church of God which is at Philippi,"* And if only the 
presbj^ers and deacons of that church are mentioned in the 
words quoted by Dr. Campbell,'|' it might be owing to the 
Episcopal charge being vacant at the time when this epistle 
was written, as was the case at Rome, when Cyprian, bishop 
of Carthage, wrote his letters to the presbyters of that place. 
But what shall we say of our Lecturer's asserting it, as 
" evident from the above quotation, that Polycarp knew of 
no Christian minister superior to the presbyters," when, 
together with his own, he earnestly recommended, and actu- 
ally sent to the Philippians, at their desire, those veVy 
epistles of Ignatius, in which the office and the duties of 
a bishop, as distinguished from those of the presbyters, are 
so fully and frequently insisted on, that Polycarp might 
well think it unnecessary for him to say any thing farther on 
that subject ? Being himself a bishop, and writing in that 
character to the Philippians, he might justly consider the 
epistles of Ignatius, which they were so desirous to see, as 
perfectly sufficient to establish the regard which was due to 
the Episcopal office, especially as one of these epistles was 

* If the author of this epistle had not been distinguished by a supe- 
rior dignity of office, we could hardly suppose it consistent with his mo- 
desty and self-denial, to have named himself only, and made no mention 
of his brethren, but by the general name of presbyters : A circumstance, 
v/hich obliged even Blondel to make the following remark — '• Id tamcn 
in S. Martyris epistola peculiare apparet, quod earn privatim suo et presbyte- 
Torum nomine ad Philippensium fraternitatem dedit, ac sibi quandam supra 
presbyteros — viri^oxw reservasse videtur, ut jam tum in Episcopali apic« 
constitutum reliquos Smyrnensium presbyteros gradu superasse conjicere 
liceat." Apol. p. 14. 

t Lecture iv. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 1^7 

addressed to himself as bishop of Smyrna, and another of 
them to the church of that place, exhorting them to be obe- 
dient to their bishop, and to do nothing of what belongs to 
the church without his consent. 

Indeed, the epistles of Ignatius bear such strong undeni- 
able evidence to the existence of three distinct orders in the 
Christian ministry, known by the name of bishops, pres- 
byters and deacons, that there is no possibility of evading 
the force of this positive testimony, but by boldly affirming, 
that the epistles themselves are spurious, or have been so 
interpolated by various transcribers, as to leave but a very 
small, if any degree of credit due to them. This has been 
the pretence, in one shape or other, of all the advocates for 
presbyterian parity, from the days of Calvin down to Dr. 
Campbell ^ and we have only to take notice of the same 
arguments, dressed out perhaps in different forms, according 
to the taste and ability of the several writers, who have pre- 
sumed to attack those venerable remains of ecclesiastical 
antiquity contained in the epistles of St. Ignatius. — It is 
very suitable, however, to our present design, to show ali 
proper attention to what has been said on this subject ; and 
we shall begin with observing, that Ignatius, bishop of 
Antioch, having presided over that church with admirable 
prudence and constancy, for almost forty years, was at last 
condemned to suffer death, about the tenth year of the 
reign of the Emperor Trajan, and on the way to his mar- 
tyrdom at Rome, wrote his episties to the several churches 
to which they are addressed. That some such epistles were 
written by Ignatius, is evident from the account, to which 
we have just now referred, as given by Polycarp in his 
Epistle to the Philippians, in which he tells them — " The 
epistles of Ignatius, which he wrote unto us," (that is, to 
himself, and to the church at Smyrna) " together with what 
others of his have come to our hands, we have sent to 
you, according to your order, which are subjoined to this 
epistle ; by which ye may be greatly profited ; for they treat 



I 



168 General Defence of Episcopacy i^ 

of faith, and patience, and of all things that pertain to edi* 
fication in the Lord Jesus."^ To this account from Pol}- 
carp, we may add that which is given by his disciple Ire- 
nseus, bishop of Lyons, who, as Eusebius assures us, " Was 
not ignorant of the martyrdom of St. Ignatius, and men- 
tions his epistles in these words — Thus one of our brethren 
being condemned for maintaining the faith, to be exposed 
to the wild beasts, said — I am the wheat of God, and shall 
be ground by the teeth of wild beasts, that I may be found 
the pure bread of Christ."f Which words, thus quoted by 
Irenseus, are found in the epistle of St. Ignatius to the Ro- 
mans. To this undoubted testimony, may be added that of 
Origen, who was bom before Irenseus died, and has left us 
two quotations from the epistles of Ignatius, which are 
both to be found in our present copies. And Eusebius, in 
his ecclesiastical history ,j gives us a full account of these 
epistles, and tells us where the holy martyr wrote them. 

Such are the testimonies, which, together with those of 
Athanasius, Jerome, and many others, serve to prove, that 
the epistles of Ignatius, as published by archbishop Usher, 
in an ancient Latin version, and soon after by Isaac Vossius 
in the original Greek, from a manuscript in the Florentine 
library, are undoubtedly the genuine epistles of that primi- 
tive martyr : a point, which has been so clearly established 
by the learned Dr. Pearson, late bishop of Chester, in his 
admirable work on this subject, as to leave room for no 
objection or argument of any weight to appear, against the 
genuineness of these epistles, which has not been already 
refuted in his unanswerable vindication of them.|| If, 
therefore, it shall still be urged by such writers as Dn 
Campbell, against the authority of Ignatius, that " we 
cannot with safety found a decision on an author, with 

* See Archbishop Wake's Translation of the Genuine Epistles of the 
Apostolical Fathers, p. 59. 

f Irenaeus Contra Her. lib. v. cap. 28. \ Lib. iii. c. S6. 

Ij See Vi'iulicix I^natian<e, by Dr. Pearson. 



/ 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 169 

whose works transcribers have made so free," we think it 
sufficient to reply in the words of archbishop Wake, " that 
if it be meant, that the same has happened to the epistles of 
Ignatius, as has done to all other ancient writings, that let- 
ters or words have been mistaken, either by the careless- 
ness or ignorance of the transcribers, we see no reason 
why we should deny that to have befallen these epistles, 
which has been the misfortune of all other pieces of the like 
antiquity. This, therefore, it has been often declared,^ 
that neither do we contend about ; nor can any one, who 
reads the best copies we have of them with any care or 
judgment, make any doubt about it. But as for any large 
interpolations, such as were those of the copies before ex- 
tant jf for any changes or mistakes that may call in question 
either the credit or authority of these epistles, as we now 
have them, we utterly deny that there are any such in these 
last editions of them :"J nor, we may add, has even the 
learned Dr. Campbell offered any thing to induce us to 
believe that there are. He has indeed acknowledged, that 
"the epistles in question ought not to be rejected in the 
lump," but still insists " that undue freedoms have been 
used, even with the purest of them, by some over-zealous 
partizan of the priesthood." And if we should maintain, 
that this is an undue freedom used by " an over-zealous 
partizan" of presbytery, we could bring forward as much 
proof in support of our assertion, as he has produced for 
the purpose of stamping the mark of forgery, or interpo- 
lation, on the epistles of Ignatius. All that he has offered 
like argument on the subject,|| amounts at most, even by 
his own account, to " raising suspicions of their authenti- 
city, or at least of their integrity ;" but he surely knew, 
that it requires more than suspicion^ however strong, to fix 
forgery, or prove interpolation in any writing. 

* Vossii annot. passim, Pearson Vind. Ignat. Proleg. p. 20. 
f That is, before those of Usher and Vossiiis. 
% Sec Archbishop Wak<;'s Translation, Sic. p, 39. || Lecture vi. 

22 



176 General Defence of ^piscopctdt/i 

What seems to be the greatest ground of offence, as weii 
as of suspicion, is the " nauseous repetition,'* as he calls it, 
*' of obedience and subjection to the bishop, presbyters, 
and deacons, to be found in the letters of Ignatius." But 
has he shown, or even attempted to show, that there are 
any manuscripts, or editions of letters, in which this offen- 
sive " nauseous repetition" is not to be met with ? No : 
but the sentiment itself, and the manner in which it is ex- 
pressed, are so different from the spirit and style of the 
apostolic age, as to afford " strong presumptive evidence 
against the entire genuineness of the letters in question." 
Such is the judgment which Professor Campbell wished 
his pupils to form on this controverted point ;* very differ- 
ent indeed from the opinion delivered by one, who must 
be acknowledged a no less competent judge of their merit, 
even the learned translator of the epistles of Ignatius into 
English, who assures us, that " there is nothing in these 
epistles, as we now have them, either unworthy of the 
spirit of Ignatius, or the character that antiquity has given 
us of them ; nothing disagreeing to the time in which he 
\VTOte, or that should seem to speak them to have been the 
work of any later author. Now this, as it hardly ever 
fails to discover such pieces as are falsely imposed upon 
ancient authors; so there not appearing any thing of this 
kind in these epistles, inclines us the more readily to con- 
clude, that they were undoubtedly written by him, whose 
they are said to be."'j' And when we are thus well assured 
that they are so, and have every reason to believe that this 

* It is worthy of notice, how differently Dr. Campbell himself ex- 
{Sresses his opinion of the Ignatian epistles, in the preface to his transla- 
tion of St. John's gospel, where he says — " There are evident refer- 
rences to this gospel, though without naming the author, in some epis- 
tles ©f Ignatius, the authenticity of which is strenuously maintained by 
bishop Pearson, and other critics of name — It was in the beginning of 
the second (century) when the above mentioned Ignatius wrote his epis- 
tles." — Dr. Campbell's Translation of the Gospels is dedicated to a bishop. 

t See Archbishop Wake's Translation, p. 34. 



General Defence of Episcopacy* \ii 

is a true and just accbuht of their character, we need not 
be much moved by any of those objections, which the anti- 
Episcopal writers have made to their authenticity ; one of 
which Dr. Campbell states to be, that " their style, in many 
places, is not suited," as he expresses it, " to the simplicity 
of the times immediately succeeding the times of the apos- 
tles ;" and then, after enlarging a litde on this topic, in a way 
that only seems like reasoning, and has but the appearance 
of argument, he adds, " but it is not the style only which 
has raised suspicion, it is chiefly the sentiments." And 
the chief sentiment, which he has selected to justify this 
suspicion, is Expressed in the following words of Ignatius 
to Polycarp — " Attend to the bishop, that God may attend 
to you. I pledge my soul for theirs, who are subject to 
the bishop, presbyters, and deacons. Let my part in God 
be with them." 

After quoting these words, our Lecturer asks—" Was 
it the doctrine of Ignatius, that all that is necessary to sal- 
vation in a Christian, is an implicit subjection to the bi- 
shop, presbyters, and deacons ? Be it, that he means only 
in spiritual matters. Is this the style of the apostles to 
their Christian brethren ?" Yes ; we answer, it is the very 
style even of that great apostle, to whom he immediately 
refers, and who, after giving this command to the believing 
Hebrews—" Obey them that have the rule over you, and 
submit yourselves," gives also the reason and object of his 
command — "for they watch for your souls, as they that 
must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not 
with grief;"* that is, may give a joyful account of your 
obedience and submission to them, when they are speaking 
to you in the name of Christ, and teaching you to observe 
all things whatsoever he has commanded. For it was only 
when the bishop, with his presbyters and deacons, were 
thus employed in the careful discharge of their duty as 

* Bcb. xiji. ir. 



1 f2 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

ambassadors for Christ, that Ignatius required the Chris- 
tians at Smyrna to hearken and attend to them ; and if they 
did so, he might very safely assure them of salvation ; just 
as we find two of our Lord's apostles quoting that passage 
of scripture which saith — ^^ Whosoever shall call upon the 
name of the Lord, shall be saved ;"* where " calling on 
the name of the Lord," must necessarily imply faith in that 
name, which is the " only one given under heaven, whereby 
we must be saved," and obedience to that Lord, " who 
became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that 
obey him." Yet the same St. Paul, who said of himself 
and his fellow apostles — " We preach not ourselves, but 
Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your servants for 
Jesus' sake," could also represent himself as a humble in- 
strument of that salvation, which this Jesus had purchased, 
when, speaking as the apostle of the Gentiles, he said, on 
that account, " I magnify mine office, if by any means I 
may provoke to emulation, them which are my flesh, and 
might save some of tIiem»'^-\ 

In the same light we find him representing his fellow 
labourer Timothy, when having pointed out what things he 
was to " command and teach," he exhorts him to " continue 
in them, and to take heed unto himself, and unto the 
doctrine ; for in doing this," says he, " thou shalt both save 
thyself, and them that hear thee.'^''X Where then was the 
presumption or impropriety in Ignatius " thus exhibiting 
the pattern, which had been given by that great apostle," 
and in the name of his blessed Master, promising salvation 
to those who should hearken to the doctrine, and follow 
the directions delivered by his commissioned servants, and 
agreeably to his holy will ? If this was the " predominant 
scope" of Ignatius, in the letters ascribed to him, does he 
deserve the imputation of " preaching himself and other 

* Acts ii. 21, and Rom. x. 13. f Rom. xi. 13, 14. 

\ 1 Tim. iv. 16. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 173 

ecclesiastics ?" And was it fair to say, as Dr. Campbell has 
said, that " the only consistent declaration which would 
have suited the. author of these epistles, must have been 
the reverse of Paul's. We preach not Christ Jesus the 
Lord, but so far only as may conduce to the increase of our 
influence, and the exaltation of our power ; nay,^ for an 
object so important, we are not ashamed to preach up 
ourselves your masters, with unbounded dominion over 
your faith, and consequently over both soul and body." 

Where are the words of Ignatius to be found that can 
bear such a harsh interpretation? We have read all his 
epistles from beginning to end, but have not met with a 
single expression in them that can justly be said to lead 
to such an unworthy conclusion. On the contrary, we see 
his humility no less conspicuous than his zeal, when we 
£nd him declaring to the Magnesians — " As one of the 
least among you, I am desirous to forewarn you, that ye 
fall not into the snares of vain doctrine ;" and to the Ro- 
mans — " I do not^ as Peter and Paul command you. They 
were apostles, I a condemned man ; they were free, but I 
am even to this day a servant;''^ thereby alluding to his ap- 
proaching sufferings as the conclusion of his service^ anoF 
acting not at all consistently with that affectation of power, 
that desire of worldly exaltation, which, on the supposition 
of his epistles being genuine, as we have very good ground 
to believe they are, our Professor thinks it necessary, for 
the sake of " propriety, as well as consistency," to ascribe 
to this truly pious and venerable prelate ; of whom it may 
indeed be said, in the words of Dr. Campbell, that he has 
thus " suffered a second martyrdom" in his character, for 
no other reason but because he is considered as " the first 
ecclesiastical author who mentions bishop, presbyter, and 
deacon, as three distinct orders of church officers." And 
what wonder is it, if he were really so, when in the re- 
stricted sense of *' ecclesiastical authors," as excluding the 
inspired writings, we know of none whose writings are 



174 General Defence of Episcopai-tj*^' 

received as authentic, prior to Ignatius, unless Clemens of 
Rome: and does Ignatius contradict or diiFer materially 
from Clemens ? Or does Polycarp, of Smyrna, whom Dr* 
Campbell has quoted with so much triumph, differ so 
widely from Ignatius, as to show not merely a '* diversity 
in style, but a repugnancy in sentiment ?" What though 
both these old bishops of Rome and of Smyrna speak in 
very honourable terms, not only of presbyters, but of dea- 
cons, and seem to direct the attention of those whom they 
addressed chiefly to these two orders of ministers ? Do 
any such hints and directions, with all that can be drawn 
from them in the way of doubtful inference, speak so de- 
cisively in favour of Presbytery, as the precise words of 
Ignatius, without any comment, do in support of Episco- 
pacy ? Are the specious arguments of philosophy held 
forth to prove the formation of all things by a first cause, 
so clear and satisfying a demonstration to the mind of a 
Christian, as this single and express assertion of the in- 
spired historian, " In the beginning God created the hea- 
%'en and the earth ?" 

But it is needless to insist any longer on this part of our 
subject, since our Lecturer himself thinks proper to close 
it in these words — " But should we admit after all, in op- 
position to strong presumptive evidence, the entire genu- 
ineness of the letters in question, all that could be fairly 
inferred from the concession is, that the distinction of 
orders, and subordination of the presbyters, obtained about 
twenty or thirty years earlier than I have supposed, and 
that it was a received distinction at Antioch, and in Asia 
Minor, before it was known in Macedonia, and other parts 
of the Christian church. That its prevalence has been 
gradual, and that its introduction has arisen from the 
example and influence of some of the principal cities, is 
highly probable." It is thus that our learned Professor is 
pleased to make concessions, for the sake of drawing such 
inferences from them, as may best suit his own purpose^ 



General Defence of Episcopacy. 17^ 

and at last to decide the very point in question, and a mat- 
ter of the utmost importance, by no other argument, than 
that his account of it " is highly probable ;" an argument, 
which, whatever may be allowed to it in speculative debate, 
can have but little weight in determining matters of fact. 
Yet if we were to make the most of our adversary's con- 
cession, that when Ignatius wrote, the " distinction of 
orders, and subordination of presbyters, which we plead 
for, was received at Antioch, and in Asia Minor," and to 
admit his " probability, that the example of some of the 
principal cities" would have considerable influence in favour 
of such distinction, we should not be ashamed to own, that 
the example of such a " principal" place, as the scripture 
describes Ai;itioch to have been, has great weight with us ; 
and that we think it a point of no small consequence gained, 
to find our scheme of church government so early received 
" in a city," where the disciples were first called Chris- 
tians.* 

But the epistles of Ignatius not only show what was the 
form of government in the church at the time when he 
wrote them, (which was a very few years after the death 
of the aposde St. John) and what it was in the city of An- 
tioch, of which he had been bishop near forty years ; they 
also exhibit the clearest evidence of his belief, that the 
three distinct orders of bishops, presbyters and deacons 
were of divine institution, and essential to the regular con- 
stitution of the Christian church. In these epistles he men- 
tions several of his contemporary bishops by name, Onesi- 
mus, bishop of the Ephesians ; Damas, of the Magnesians ; 
Polybius, of the Trallians ; and Polycarp, of the Smyrnians ; 
and still as he mentions them, he highly commends the 
presbyters and deacons for their obedience to them, as to 
the command of God, and according to the will of Jesus, 
Christ. Having saluted the Trallians in the fulness of his 

* Acts xi. 26. 



1 76 General Defence of Episcopacy » 

apostolic character, he earnestly exhorts them to be subject 
to their bishop, presbyters and deacons ; for without these, 
there is no church : And then, entreating them to beware 
of the poisonous doctrine of certain dangerous heretics, he 
adds — -" And this you will do, while you are not puffed up, 
nor separated from God, even Jesus Christ ; nor from the 
bishop, and the commands of the apostles. He that is 
within the altar is pure ; but he that does any thing" (be- 
longing to the altar) " without the bishop, presbyters and 
deacons, is defiled in his conscience." So likewise in the 
inscription of his epistle to the Philadelphians, he " salutes 
them in the blood of Jesus Christ, our everlasting and per- 
manent joy, especially if they were at unity with the bishop, 
and the presbyters that were with him, and the deacons, 
who were appointed according to the mind of Jesus Christ, 
whom he had, according to his own will, established with 
firmness by his holy spirit." And in the- epistle to the 
church at Smyrna, after mentioning the reverence which is 
due to the sacred orders of the ministry, " as the com- 
mandment of God," he adds — ••' Let no man do any thing 
of what belongs to the church, separately from the bishop. 
Let that be esteemed a valid eucharist, which is celebrated 
by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Without the 
bishop, it is not lawful either to baptize, or to celebrate the 
feast of charity ; but that which he approves, is also pleas- 
ing unto God, that so whatever is done, may be sure and 
well done." 

These are some of the many passages which might be 
produced from the epistles of Ignatius, to evince his belief 
of a truth, which even these few are sufficient to show he 
certainly did belieye, that the principal care, and govern- 
ment of the church of Christ had been committed by his 
« apostles to those, who, immediately after the apostolic age, 
were peculiarly distinguished by the title of bishops^ having 
under them the two inferior orders of presbyters and dea- 
cons^ discharging their several offices always in conjunction 



General Defence of Episcopacy* Vjf 

with, and subordination to, their respective bishops, with- 
out whose authority, in the opinion of Ignatius, no bap- 
tism was to be administered, no eucharist celebrated ; no- 
thing, in short, to be done, which more immediately be- 
longed to the service of the church, or was included in the 
commission which our Lord gave his apostles, to be con- 
tinued to the end of the world, for making the nations 
Christian, and teaching them to observe all things neces- 
sary to salvation and happiness. Such was the doctrine 
delivered by this holy and venerable bishop of Antioch, 
who could not but be perfecdy acquainted with the form of 
government, which the apostles, by their Lord's command, 
had settled in the church, since he lived so near to their 
times, and had not only been instructed by them, but, as 
St. Chrysostom tells us, actually received his ordinatioa 
from their sacred hands. It is likewise to be considered, 
that these episdes were written by him, in the immediate 
prospect of that violent death, to which he was condemned 
for his bold and steady adherence to the faith of Christ, 
and when, having but a short time to live, he was desirous 
to leave behind him this last and dying testimony of his 
zeal for the honour of his blessed Master, and the advance- 
ment of that glorious cause, for which he was about to 
suffer. All these are considerations which must add great 
weight to the evidence of Ignatius, and may well convince 
every impartial reader of his epistles, how unreasonable it 
is to expect or desire any stronger, or more ample testi- 
mony than that which they bear to the Episcopal govern- 
ment of what even Dr. Campbell is obliged to acknowledge 
to be the " truly primitive church." 

In the middle of his remarks on Ignatius, the Doctor 
thought proper to introduce, without much appearance of 
connection, another writer of the second age, " in whose 
writings," he says, the " names bishop and presbyter, 
and others of the like import, are sometimes used indis- 
criminately." This writer is no other than Irenseus, who 

.23 



1 T8 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

was first a presbyter, and afterwards bishop of the church 
of Lyons, and having successively discharged these two 
offices, can hardly be supposed lo confound, or be ignorant 
of, the distinction between them. Indeed, our Lecturer 
ackno^\dedges, " that the distinction of these, as of differ- 
ent orders, began about this time generally to prevail; 
although the difference was not near so considerable as it 
became afterwards. Accordingly Irenseus," he says, " talks 
in much the same style of both. What at one time he as* 
cribes to bishops, at another he ascribes to presbytei*s : he 
speaks of each in the same terms, as entitled to obedience 
from the people, as succeeding the apostles in the ministry 
of the word, as those by whom the apostolic doctrine and 
traditions had been handed down."-^Now, the proof of all 
this similarity of order, and sameness of office in bishop 
and presbyters, is taken from one single passage of the 
work of Irenseus against the heretics of his time, wherein, 
speaking of apostolic tradition, he defines it ta be thaty 
" which, from the apostles, is preserved through successions 
of presbyters in the churches."* On which passage Dr* 
Campbell makes this observation— ^Here not only " are the 
presbyters mentioned as the successors of the apostles, but 
in ranging the ministries, no notice is taken of any inter- 
vening order, such as that of bishops." And for that very 
reason, as such an intervening order certainly existed in 
the days of Irenaeus, we may justly conclude, that the 
presbyters were not mentioned by him, " as the successors 
of the apostles ;" nor do his words imply any such thing ; 
being solely intended to point out a continued succession 
and course of presbyters, or, as we would now say, clergy 
in general, as (custodes) guardians of apostolic tradition. 

* The words quoted by Dr. Campbell are these: <' Cum autem ad earn 
iterum traditionem quae est ab apostolis, quae per successiones presbyte- 
rorum in ecclesiis custoditur, provocamus eos, qui adversantur traditioni, 
dicent se non solum presbyteris sed etiam apostolis existentes sapien- 
tiores, synceram invenisse veritatem." Lib. iii. cap. 2. 



Gmeral Defence of Episcopacy, \ 79 

It is well known, that the word presbyter may refer to 
age, as well as to office; and though the writers of the 
second century never apply the title of presbyter to a bi- 
shop of their own time, but always appropriate it to sub" 
ordinate presbyters, to express the distinction between bi- 
shops and them; yet when they speak of bishops of former 
times, they make no scruple of giving them sometimes the 
appellation of presbyters, as being a term equivalent to that 
of ancients^ signifying not their office, but their antiquity 
in the church, and in that sense, it might be applied not to 
one only, but to all the orders of the sacred ministry. 
That this was the sense in which Irenseus applied it, in the 
passage cpoted by Dr. Campbell, is sufficiently evident 
from other parts of his writings, where it is expressly 
mentioned, that in the chief care and government of the 
church, the bishops only were the successors of the apos- 
tles. Thus, when arguing against the heretics who infested 
the church in his time, to show that their doctrine was not 
that of the apostles, nor handed down from them, he 
makes the following appeal — -" We can reckon up those 
who were by the apostles ordained bishops in the churches, 
and those who were their successors even to our own time. 
They never taught nor knew any of the wild opinions of 
these men : And had the apostles known any hidden mys- 
teries, which they imparted to none but the perfect (as the 
heretics pretend), they would have committed them with 
particular care to those persons, to whom they committed 
the churches themselves. For they would be extremely 
desirous, that those should be perfect, and unreprovable in 
all things, whom they left to be their successors, and to 
whom they consigned their own authority." — He then adds 
— " Because it would be tedious to enumerate the succes- 
sion of bishops in all the churches, he would instance in 
that of Rome ; which succession he brings down to Eleu- 
therius, who was the twelfth from the aposdes, and was 



180 General Defence of Episcopacy » 

bishop there, when Irenseus wrote this treatise ;"^ in ano- 
ther part of which he tells us, that the true knowledge is 
*' the doctrine of the apostles, and the ancient state of the 
church throughout the world, and the character of the 
body of Christ, according to the successions of bishops, 
to whom they committed that church, which is in every 
place, and has descended even unto us."'!' ^^ these pas- 
sages of IrensBus, where the succession from the apostles 
is plainly and purposely held up to view, we see *' no no- 
tice taken of any intervening order," such as that of Dr. 
Campbell's presbyters, as in any way necessary to the car- 
rying on that succession, which, together with their doc- 
trine, was delivered by the apostles to the several churches 
founded by them, and is therefore very properly made use 
of, to show that the doctrine was most likely to be found 
where the succession w^as regular. 

The same argument, we have seen, was employed by 
another ecclesiastical writer of this period, the much ad- 
mired, yet deeply regretted TertuUian, who speaks of it as 
a thing universally admitted in his time, that the apostles 



• His words are, " Habemus annumerare eos, qui ab apostolis instituti 
sunt Episcopi in eccleaijs, et successores eorum usque ad nos, qui nil tale 
ijocuerint, neque cognoverunt, quale ab his deliratur. Etenim si recon- 
dita mysteria scissent apostoli, quae seorsim et latenter ab reliquis perfectos 
docebant, his vel maxime traderent ea, quibus etiam ipsas ecclesias com- 
juittebant. Valde enim perfectos, et irreprehensibiles in omnibus eos vo- 
lebant esse, quos et successores relinquebant, suum ipsoruro locum magis- 
terii tradentes. — Sed quoniam valde longum est in hoc tali volumine, om- 
siium ecclesiarum enumerare successiones, maximse et antiquissimae, et om- 
nibus ccgn.tse, a gloriosissimis duobus apostolis Petro et Paulo Romse fun- 
datse et constitutae ecclesise, earn quam habet ab apostolis traditionem, et 
annunciatam hominibus fidem per successiones Episcoporum pervenientehi 
usque ad nos, indicantes confundimus omnes eos," &c. Iren. lib. iii. cap. 3- 

t Agnitio vera est apostolorum doctrina, et antiquus ecclesise status in 
■universe mundo, et character corporis Christi secundum successiones 
Episcoporum quibus illi earn, quse in unoquoque loeo est, ecclesiam tra- 
diderunt, quae pervenit usque ad nos, &c. Lib. iv. cap. 6a. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 181 

placed bishops in all the churches which they planted ; of 
which he gives a particular instance in that of Smyrna and 
of Rome, and argues against the heretics in the same 
manner as Irenaeus had done ; proving, as has been already 
shown, that l)y this succession, from the apostles, of regu- 
lar and lawful bishops, the true faith was preserved in all 
the churches, which had their foundation in some one or 
other of the apostles, and thereby retained the apostolic 
doctrine. And however Tertullian may have erred in 
matters of opinion, by mistaking the meaning of some 
texts of scripture, and building too much on his own fan- 
ciful interpretation of them, there can be no doubt as to the 
regard which is due to his testimony, when asserting such 
a well known fact as that of the succession of bishops from 
the apostles ; a thing so fully attested by the ecclesiastical 
registers to which he refers. 

Passing over what our Lecturer says of two short, an^, 
we suspect, spurious, letters from Pius, bishop of Rome, to 
Justus, bishop of Vienna, as not worthy of notice, we come 
to consider a passage quoted by him from Clement of 
Alexandria, who wrote at the close of the second century, 
and which he thus translates — " Just so in the church, the 
presbyters are entrusted with the dignified ministry, the 
deacons with the subordinate. Both kinds of service the 
angels perform to God in the administration of this lower 
world."* Dr. Campbell then adds—" Here the distinction 
is strongly marked between presbyter and deacon : But is 
it not plain from his words, that Clement considered the 
distinction between bishop and presbyter, as, even in his 
days, comparatively not worthy of his notice ?"f We 
must, however, beg leave to say, that this inference does 

• The words in Greek, as quoted by Dr. Campbell, are — O/xotwj ^e xast 

i)Vriffiix.viv Oi dtajcovoi, tccvIo,; o(,jx<PoS\a!; oiXKoviocg ayysAot re vrif^lavloci tw 
®B(i}, KoCloc rr,v ruv wfpiyEiwv ot/coyo^iav, Strom. 1. 1, 
t LfCcture vi. 



' 182 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

not appear so plain as the Doctor thinks ; not only because 
Clement's words evidently refer to the allusion he had been 
drawing from philosophy and physic, as administering to 
soul and body, the twofold distinction in man ; but chiefly 
because in another passage of this very work, he illustrates 
what he had said of the services of angels, by observing, 
that the faithful presbyter, though not honoured with the 
first seat on earthy shall yet sit on one of the four and twenty 
thrones mentioned in St. John's revelation ; from which 
he takes occasion to show, that the gradual promotion of 
bishops^ presbyters^ and deacons^ bears resemblance to the 
orders of angels,* and so gives ground for comparing the 
hierarchy in the church on earth to that which takes place 
in heaven. And that this same Clement was very far from 
'' considering the distinction between bishop and presbyter, 
as not worthy of his notice," is still farther evinced by 
what he says in another of his works, where, having pointed 
out some texts of scripture, as containing a summary of 
the duties which concern all Christians in general, he adds 
4^" that there are other precepts without number, which 
concern men in particular capacities ; some which relate to 
presbyters, others which belong to bishops, and others 
respecting deacons :"t — from which it must plainly appear, 
not only that Clement regarded the distinction between 
bishop, presbyter, and deacon, as a matter that ought to 
be duly attended to, but also that he considered the re- 
spective duties of these several orders, as distinctly stated 
in the holy scriptures. 

■^ Etts* kou Oil svlacvQoi kccJoc t*iv sy.K'KrKncx.v tsfoxovoci^ z'jno'K.OTrwv^ 'a^io'^v 

7yyj^a.vso"ty. Strom. 1. VI. 

TO-t? ^QxoKi roag oiyioag at juev 'T<TpHcrby'lEpoK»ai ds E7rto">co7roK, a.4 oi oiocKOVon;* 
Poedag. lib. iii. c. 12, as quoted by archbishop Potter — On Church Govern- 
ment'^^. 165, which may be very usefully consulted by those who wish 
to be properly informed on this subject. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 83 

We have now brought down the evidence in support of 
apostolic Episcopacy, as the government of the primitive 
church, to that period which our learned Professor has 
thought proper to fix for ascertaining what he calls the 
first step of the hierarchy. We must, however, consider 
it as the second step of his course, whereby he advances 
from presbytery to what he calls parochial Episcopacy, 
and which he pretends to found on the unanimous consent 
of antiquity, " in assigning to one bishop no more than one 
E>cxA>i,-i» or congregation, and one TTot^oiJtta or parish." We 
have already taken notice of his opinion respecting the first 
of these words, which, though usually translated churchy 
" when it is not applied to the whole Christian community, 
can only," he says, " denote a single congregation of 
Christians ; the plural number, churches^ being invariably 
used, when more congregations than one are spoken ofj 
unless the subject be of the whole commomvealth of 
Christ."* Hence he fondly draws, what he thinks an 
unavoidable conclusion, that " as one bishop is invariably 
considered, in the most ancient usage, as having only one 
church or congregation, it is manifest that his inspection at 
first was only over one parish."!* 

Laying this down as the fundamental position, on which 
rises under his masterly hands that specious fabric which he 
has dig-nified with the name of " parochial Episcopacy," 
he seems to feel himself standing on sure ground ; and his 
pupils no doubt would be encouraged to view it as such, 
having had no intimation given them that it was the very 
same ground from which so many of his predecessors had 
been successively beaten, and which was assumed, with 
the same confidence, about a century ago, by the author of 
a work already referred to, called an " Enquiry into the 
constitution^ discipline^ unity and worship of the Primitive 
Church^"* Of the striking similarity between this work, 

* Lecture vl f Lecture vi. 



1 84 General Defence of Ephcopaty, 

and that part of Dr. Campbell's Lectures which is now 
before us, I cannot express my opinion more justly, or to 
better purpose, than in the words of a learned divine of the 
church of England, who, in some remarks lately published 
on this subject, says-—" Having attended to the progress 
of this controversy, and particularly marked the ground on 
which, from time to time, it has been placed, I have no 
difficulty in tracing the road which the Professor has tra- 
velled ; and there is little doubt on my mind, that the pub- 
lication last mentioned was the one which the Professor 
had before him when he put together that part of his Lec- 
tures which is now more immediately under consideration ; 
because the same arrangement of argument and proof, the 
same mutilation of extract, the same want of appeal to that 
evidence which the scriptures are competent to furnish, 
together with the same turn of expression, are to be met 
with in the publications of both writers; a circumstance 
not to be accounted for but on the supposition of one hav- 
ing copied from the other."* 

Now, the foundation, which the Enquirer first, and our 
Lecturer after him, have both considered as firmly laid in the 
constitution of the primitive church, is plainly this, that the 
charge of one bishop was originally confined to one congre- 
gation, or parish, which they both define, almost in the same 
terms, to be " a competent number of Christians dwelling 
near together, having one bishop, pastor or minister set 
over them, with whom they all met at one time to worship 
and serve God." This Dr. Campbell further explains, by 
" obsen^ing once and again, that every church had its own 
pastors, and its own presbytery, independently of every 
other church : And when one of the presbyters came to be 
considered as the pastor^ by way of eminence, the rest were 
regarded only as his assistants, vicars or curates, who acted 

* See Mr. Daubeny's Prelimviary Discourse to those lately published 
on the Great Doctrine of Atonement, p. 90. 



General Defence of episcopacy, 1 85 

ander his direction ;" just as the Enquirer had before illus- 
trated his definition of a presbyter, by observing, " that as 
a curate hath the same mission and power with the minis- 
ter whose place he supplies, yet not being the minister of 
that place, he cannot perform there any acts of his minis- 
terial function, without leave from the minister thereof ; so 
a presb}i;er had the same order and power with a bishop, 
whom he assisted in his cure, yet being not the bishop or 
minister of that cure, he could not there perform any parts 
of his pastoral office without the permission of the bishop 
thereof^ so that what we generally render bishops, priests 
and deacons, would be more intelligible in our tongue, if 
we did express it by rectors, vicars and deacons ; by rec- 
tors understanding the bishops, and by vicars the presby- 
ters; the former being the actual incumbents of a place, 
and the latter curates or assistants, and so different in de- 
gree, but yet equal in order," 

Thus it is, that these two authors go hand in hand in 
their definition and explanation of the point in question, 
the latter borrowing from the former, and both founding 
their application of the term parish^ on the etymology of 
the original word, to which they tell us, " that there is 
commonly a strict regard paid, in the first application of a 
name to any particular purpose," We know very well that 
in the primitive times, to which we are now looking back, 
a bishop's charge was called his Tloc^oiy.icc or parish ; and 
we are told in some Lexicons, that the verb ria^oiKsw, from 
which the English word parish is derived, signifies " habi- 
tare juxta," to dwell or inhabit near. Yet some of the 
writers of the New Testament use the word in a different 
sense, of which several instances could be produced ; and a 
very " learned and accurate" Lexicographer shows from 
these instances, that the word refers to " a sojourning, or 
temporary dwelling in a strange or foreign country," and 
was therefore very descriptive of the character and situation 
of those he*ivenly-minded Christians, who, as strangers 

24 



5> 



1 86 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

and pilgrims, passed the time of their sojourning here in 
fear, looking forward in hope to a more settled habitsi- 
tion.* 

Our Lecturer indeed says-—" It must not be imagined, 
that he lays too great stress on the import of words, whose 
significations in time come insensibly to alter :" And yet, 
without taking any notice of the alteration, which time has 
introduced into the use of the original word in question, 
he immediately after asserts, " that the word Xla^oixta, in 
JaSitm parochia, can be applied no otherwise, when it re» 
Jates to place, than the term parish is with us at this day ; 
whereas the fact is, as clearly exhibited by a learned and 
inquisitive searcher into these matters,f that though this 
term was applied in the primitive times to signify an Epis- 
copal diocese, yet it was so far from being confined to a 
single congregation, or to one place of worship, and the 
inhabitants near it, that it comprehended all that were in- 
<:luded in the civil government of every city, and the re- 
gion round about it, and, therefore, was of greater or 
smaller extent, according as the government of such city 
liappened to have a larger or lesser jurisdiction. 

In opposition, however, to this well established fact, our 
Professor still insists on his being able to evince, beyond 
pll possible doubt, as be affirms in the beginning of his 
seventh Lecture, that " the bishop's cure was originally 
confined to a single church or congregation ; which he in- 

* See in Mr. Parkhurst's Greek and English Lexicon to the Nev) Tes- 
tarnent, the words— TTa^oiHEw, occurring Luke xxiv. 18. Heb. xi. 9. — 
Ita^ot^ciot, occurring Acts xiii. 17. Applied spiritually, 1 Peter i. 17. — ■ 
na^ot;co?, occurring Acts vii. 6—29. Applied spiritually, Eph. ii. 19, 1 
Pet. ii. 11. In conformity with the meaning annexed to it by the in- 
spired writers, Suicer renders the word ITajioijfEw by the Latin — Advena 
or Peregrinus sum, and cites as authority for so doing, Pkilo Judaeus, 
Basil and Theodoret. — See an Original Draught of the Primitive Church, 
ajTc. p. 34, 25. 

t See Mr. Bimgham's Origines Ecclesiasticce, or the Antiquities of the 
Christian Church, vol. iii. p. 344, &c. 



I 

General Dejence of Episcopacy* 1 gf 

tefids to show from the particulars recorded m ancient 
authors, in relation both to him and to it, and which," he 
says, " can be verified from the clearest and most explicit 
declarations of these primitive writers, particularly of Ig- 
natius, of Justin Martyr, of Irenseus, of TertuUian, of Cy- 
prian, and several others." It is somewhat strange, that 
he should have omitted an author more ancient than any 
of these, the writer of the Acts of the Apostles, who gives' 
us a particular account of the very first church formed by 
them, the church of Jerusalem, and formed, no .dOubt, as? 
a pattern to all succeeding churches. Of this church, it 
is universally agreed, as Dr. Campbell himself acknow- 
ledges, that the first bishop was James, surnamed thd 
Jitst^ a brother or near kinsman of our Lord; and whether 
he was of the number of the twelve or not, is of no conse- 
t[uence, since he is expressly called an apostle, was evi- 
dently vested with the authority of an apostolic bishop, 
and in that character placed at the head of the church iii 
Jerusalem. The marks of distinction, by which he is 
plainly pointed out in that station, are too conspicuous not 
to strike every attentive reader. When St. Peter had de- 
clared the manner of his miraculous deliverance from 
prison, to such of the disciples as he found gathered to- 
gether, he desired them to " go and show these things to 
James, and to the brethren:"* but why to James in particu- 
lar, if he was not the principal person to be informed of that 
event, and who would most probably have the brethren, 
that is, the elders or presbyters with him, as we find they 
Were on another occasion, when St. Paul having returned 
to Jerusalem, from preaching the gospel among the Gen^ 
tiles, was desirous to give an account of his success, and 
for that purpose " went in, the day following, unto JameS, 
and all the elders, or presbyters, were present J"^ In his 
epistle to the Galatians, the same St. Paul not only places 

* Acts xii. 17. t Acts xxi. 1^. 



1 88 General Defence of Episcopacy ^ 

James before Cephas and John, but speaks of those who 
came down from Judea to Antioch, as " coming from 
James,"^ and not from the other apostles and elders, of 
whom there appears to have been a considerable number 
then residing at Jerusalem : And if we turn to the fifteenth 
chapter of the Acts, where the cause of those persons 
coming down from Judea to Antioch is particularly nar- 
rated, we find, that in the council of the apostles and el- 
ders, who " came together to consider of the matter" in 
question, after Peter, Barnabas and Paul had severally 
delivered their opinions on the subject before them, James 
spoke last, introducing his discourse with this address — 
*' Men and brethren, hearken unto me," and closing it 
with a decisive sentence, which, delivered by him as pre- 
siding in the council, put an end to the controversy.']* 

All these circumstances put together, afford the most 
satisfactory evidence, that the person thus distinguished by 
the part which he acted, and the respect which was paid to 
his authority, was really, what he has been constantly re- 
presented by the concurring testimony of all antiquity, the 
fixed bishop of the whole church of Jerusalem, having a 
number of presbyters and deacons under him, and a great 
body of Christians belonging to his Episcopal charge. No, 
says Dr. Campbell, he was nothing more than " the pastor 
of a single parish, whose whole flock assembled in the same 
place, for the purposes of public worship, and that they might 
all join in one prayer and one supplication ;" the meaning of 
which is plainly this, that let the sacred writers, and the 
fathers of the church after them, say what they will of the 
numerous conversions wrought by the blessed apostles 
themselsves, or by their inspired fellow-labourers, and 
successors in the ministry of the gospel, yet the utmost 
result of all their labours, during the first three hundred 
years after Christ, could never amount to more, even in 

* Gal. ii. 12. f Acts xv. 13—19. 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 1 89 

the largest cities upon earth, including their adjacent terri- 
tories, than just such a competent number of believers as 
could be contained within the walls of a single oratory, or 
place of worship, where they might assemble with their 
bishop and presbyters, that is, according to our professor, 
with the parson and his elders, "to hear the scriptures 
read, and receive spiritual exhortations."* 

Of this his favourite scheme of " parochial Episcopacy," 
it might have been expected, that our learned Lecturer 
would have began his proof from the place where the church 
itself began, and so have taken the Jerusalem-parish, which 
has long been esteemed the mother^ as the model likewise 
of all the other churches in these early and perilous times, 
when, as an ancient writer tells us, this very parish or 
church " was so vastly enlarged by the accession of mul- 
titudes of believers, yea, even of the rulers or principal 
men of the city, that it produced an uproar of the Jews, 
of the Scribes and Pharisees, they being afraid that the 
whole city would own Jesus for the Christ."'!' Let us try, 
then, if we can discover, even from scripture itself, how 
far this was the case, since our Professor has given us no 
information concerning it, supposing, no doubt, that his 
pupils would read, and judge for themselves. 

Nothing can be more clearly expressed than the account, 
which the sacred historian gives us, of the progressive 
enlargement of the parish or diocese of Jerusalem, both 
before and after St. James was appointed its bishop by the 
other apostles. In the first chapter of the Acts, we are 
told, that the number of the disciples assembled, when 
Matthias was added to the eleven apostles, was about an 
hundred and twenty ; but these could be only a part of 
the church, as we are assured, that our Lord appeared, 
after his resurrection, to " above five hundred brethren at 

* Lecture vii. 

t Hegesippiis in Euseb, lib. ii. cap. 23. 



i 90 General Defence of Episcopacy 4 

once, the greater part of whom remained"^ when St. Paid 
wrote his first Epistle to the Corinthians. In the second 
chapter of the Acts, we read that there were added unto 
them about three thousand souls, and that " the Lord was 
daily adding to the church such as should be saved." If it 
shall be objected, that of these three thousand, who were 
converted on the day of Pentecost, there might be a cc-nsi- 
derable number, who had come up from other countries 
to celebrate that holy feast at Jerusalem, it should be 
remembered, that they are said to have " continued in the 
apostles' fellowship, and breaking of bread, and prayers ;" 
which, as the church was then situated, implies that they 
continued with them in Jerusalem, and so became inhabit- 
ants of that city, if they were not so before.f But should 
any deduction be made from their number, nothing of that 
kind can be pretended in the next instance ; for in the 
fourth chapter of the Acts, we are told, that on the preaching 
of Peter and John, " many of them which heard the word^ 
believed, and the number of the men was about five thoU' 
sandr — Again, we read in ^^ fifth chapter, that '' believers 
were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men 
and women ;" and in the sixths that " the word of God still 
increased, and the number of the disciples multiplied in 
Jerusalem greatly, and a great company of the priests wer6 
obedient to the faith." In addition to aU these successive 
accounts of the vast increase of believers, we are informed 
in the twenty first chapter of the Acts, that when Paul came 
up to Jerusalem, and went in to James and his presbyters, 
" they said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thou- 
sands% there are of Jews which believe." And when we 

* 1 Cor. XV. 6. 

t See this matter clearly stated, and a full and distinct account of the 
rising chinch at Jerusalem, in a most elaborate Defence of Diocesan Epis- 
copacy, by Henry Maurice, D. D. 

\ The original word isMufuJi^e?, myriads, which is generally rendered 
ten thousands. 



General Defence of Episcopacy , 191 

consider, that the inspired historian who relates all this had 
but little reason to exaggerate, or boast of, the prodigious 
increase of the disciples of Jesus, which at that time could 
only serve to increase the rage and violence of their ene- 
mies ; as we cannot withhold our belief of such a well-att- 
tested fact, we must be equally at a loss how to reconcile to 
reason and common sense, the contracting such numbers 
into a single congregation, or pretending that so many thou- 
sands could possibly assemble in one place, for the exercise 
of religious worship, at a time when their peculiar form of 
worship was severely prohibited, and could not be cele- 
brated or attended, but in the most private and retired 
manner. 

Dr. Campbell acknowledges, what indeed is well known, 
that " there were yet no magnificent edifices built for the 
reception of Christian assemblies, such as were afterwards 
reared at a great expense, and called churches. Their 
best accommodation, for more than a century," he says^ 
'' was the private houses of the wealthiest disciples, which 
were but ill adapted to receive very numerous congrega- 
tions." — How then, we may ask, could such a " numerous 
congregation," as that which was composed of the " many 
thousands*^ of converted Jews, whom St. Luke speaks of, 
be received, for " the purpose of public worship," into any 
private house, even of the wealthiest disciple in Jerusalem ? 
Our Lecturer very justly observes, that " it is not so much 
by the measure of the ground, as by the number of the 
people, that the extent of a pastoral charge is to be rec- 
koned j" and he supposes, " at the time the churches were 
first planted by the apostles, that the Christians at a me- 
dium, were one thirtieth part of the people." — This calcu- 
lation he carries into the country called Asia Minor, and 
*' supposes further, that country to have been equal then in 
point of populousness to what Great-Britain is at present ; 
^o that one of their bishoprics," which we know, were then 
only seven in number, " in order to afford a congregation 



192 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

equal to that of a middling parish, ought to have been equal 
in extent to thirty parishes in this island :"^' And on that 
supposition, how is it possible that the Christian inhabit- 
ants of such an extensive tract of country, and so numer- 
ous as they are here calculated to be,f could be considered 
as but a single congregation, or " assemble every Lord's 
day, for the purposes of public worship, in the same place f^ 
For so Dr. Campbell translates the Greek words et* to aulo, 
which, it seems, he had found in the " writings of those 
fathers," whose names he had just before mentioned. 

We acknowledge, that there is such an expression to be 
met with in Justin Martyr's apology to the heathen Em- 
peror for the persecuted Christians ; and though our learned 
Professor tells us, that " it is for hrevitifs sake he does 
not produce the passage at length,"^ we are yet led to sus- 
pect, that this has happened for the sake of something else, 
and because the whole passage, short as it is, and standing 
in no need of abbreviation, contained more than he was 
willing to produce, or found convenient for his purpose. 
The apologist, in offering a vindication of the persecuted 
Christians throughout the Roman Empire, takes notice of 
the general method, which they adopted in performing 
their religious service, and for that purpose mentions — that 
*' they all throughout cities and countries^ assemble in the 
same place ^ as Dr. Campbell renders ett* to aulo."!! But this 
surely could not mean, that the whole body of Christians 

* Lecture vii. 

f This calculation is well illustrated by the Anti-Jacobin Jieviewer of 
Dr. Campbell's work, who estimates the present population of Britain 
at only 7,000,000, the thirtieth part of which is about 233,333, and that, 
divided by seven, the number of angels, or bishops then in Asia Minor, 
leaves about 33,333 members for each congregation — a number by far too 
great for assembling under one roof, to " hear the scriptures read, and, 
ireceive spiritual exhortation." 

:|: Lecture vii. 

II Justin Martyr's words are, TTavlwy y.oilx roXrtj -n aypa? ixBvo-fluv im: 



General Defence of Episcopacy^ t9^ 

throughout the wide extended empire of Rome, assembled 
together in one place^ and made but one congregation ; and, 
therefore, to prevent the appearance of such a glaring ab- 
surdity, the first part of the sentence, mentioning *•' all 
throughout cities and countries l!"^ is prudently omitted, *•' for 
the sake of brevity" no doubt, both by our Lecturer and by 
the author, from whom he has almost literally copied the 
reasoning which he makes use of, on this part of his sub- 
ject.* But he should also have reflected, that the pro- 
priety of the translation on which this reasoning is founded, 
has in general no great authority to support it, and in some 
cases cannot possibly be admitted. There was no difficulty, 
however, in admitting it, in the beginning of the second 
chapter of the Acts, where the twelve apostles are said to 
have been " all with one accord in one place P"* But towards 
the conclusion of that chapter, after " the three thousand 
souls were added to them," where, it is said — ^' all that 
believe were stti to ay'/o" — our translators have rendered it—- 
" they were all together^'' that is, consorted, or companied 
with one another, but not so as to be all crowded into one 
place ; which, had it been possible, would at that time have 
been very imprudent. Beza's opinion of this passage is, 
that—-" the common assemblies of the church, with their 
mutual agreement in the same doctrine, and the great una- 
nimity of their hearts, were signified by it." — The same 
may be said of that passage in the beginning of the third 
chapter of the Acts, where it is mentioned—that " Peter 
and John went up together^ ett* to ccvV — that is — for the 
same purpose, into " the temple, at the hour of ;.rayer." 
And in the fourth chapter, where it is said — ''• that the 
kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered 

* In proof of this, see the whole second chapter of the Enquiry into the 
Constitution, i!fc. of the Primitive Church, in the last section ot which 
chapter the author indeed quotes the wovds of Justin Mavi\ r, which he 
had before omitted, and translates :hem thus — " On Sunday all the in- 
habitants, both of city and country, met together," 8;c. 

25 



/ 



1 94 General Defence of Episcopacy,, 

together^ ett* to ay7o, against the Lord, and against his Christ," 
it would be absurd to suppose that they all actually assem- 
bled in one place^ when the passage only means, that they 
conspired together for the same purpose, the words plainly 
|)ointing to the object^ and not to the place^ of their combi- 
nation ; just as that passage of Ignatius, part of which is 
quoted by Dr. Campbell, refers not to the place^ but to the 
object or purpose for which the Magnesians were to assem- 
ble together. " Do nothing, therefore," says Ignatius, 
*' without the bishop and presbyters, neither strive to make 
any thing appear a reasonable service, which is done in 
your own separate or private way ; but in coming together, 
let there be one prayer, one supplication, one mind, one 
hope ;"^ — all tending to show, that nothing was to be done 
in the way of public prayer and supplication, but as ap- 
pointed and performed by their bishop and presbyters, and 
so as to manifest a becoming love of unity and order. That 
such is the meaning of this passage of Ignatius, is evident 
from what immediately follows on the same subject, in 
which he still recommends the same unity of mind and 
spirit, in the public offices of religion ; " wherefore come 
ye all together as unto one temple of God, as to one altar, 
as to one Jesus Christ." For as he told the Christians at 
Smyrna, when exhorting them to " flee all divisions, as the 
beginning of evils — that eucharist is to be looked upon as 
valid," or well established, " which is either offered by the 
bishop, or by him to whom the bishop has given his con- 
5m^"f 

But to *^ evince," as our Lecturer says, " beyond all 
possible doubt, that the bishop's cure was originally con- 

* The words of Ignatius are — Mn^s i'/xei? mi\) ra ETrtjxoTrs x-on ruv 

aXK ETTi TO aulo, ^la, 7r^ofEK;)^nj ^ko. oiYia-ii^ ng va?, [am £^7rtf• Epist. ad 
Magnes. p. 33. 
t See Archbishop Wake's Translation. 



General Defence of Ep iscopacy, 1 95 

fined to a single church or congregation," he still appeals 
to the language of Ignatius, and insists, that as there was 
but " one place of meeting, so there was but one commu- 
nion table or altar, as they sometimes metaphorically called 
it. There is but one altar, said Ignatius,^ as there is but 
one bishop.'* This saying, we know, has been justly re- 
ceived, and understood in its full force, by every candid 
Enquirey^ into ecclesiastical antiquity, and our Professor 
might have spared the unhandsome reflection cast on those 
who differ from him in opinion, with respect to the mean- 
ing of it, where he says — " Nothing can be more con- 
temptible than the quibbles which some keen controvertists 
have employed to elude the force of this expression. They 
will have it to import one sort of unity in the first clause, 
and quite a different sort in the second, though the second 
is introduced merely in an explanation of the first. In the 
first, say they, it denotes, not a numerical, but a mystical 
unity, not one thing, but one kind of thing ; in the second, 
one identical thing."J 

In this manner does our learned Lecturer run on, ex- 
posing, as he thinks, the " chican^'* of those who pretend 
to discover any distinction in the unity referred to in the 
words of Ignatius. Yet he might have remembered, that 
there are words recorded by an inspired writer, describing 
a " sort" of unity which surely requires some distinction 
in the application. " That they all may be one," says our 
Lord, " as thou Father art in me, and I in thee, that they 
also may be one in us— that they may be one, even as we 
are one."|| Here we are obliged to consider the unity re- 
ferred to, as of a twofold nature ; a " mystical unity" de- 
scribed in the words—" that they may be one," and an 



'^ 'Ev ^v?ta?>ifioi» w? *«? ETTicTJCo'Toc, Epist. ad Fhiladelph. 
f Dr. Campbell has borrowed from the Enquirer above mentioned, a 
great part of his reasoning on this quotation from Ignatius. 
\ Lecture vii. |) St. John xvii. 21, 22. 



195 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

essential unity in the words that follow — " even as we are 
one." — The Socinian controvertists will, no doubt, call 
this distinction a " contemptible quibble ;" and insisting 
that the same " sort" of unity ought to be understood in 
both the clauses of our Saviour's expression, they will 
argue as fluently in support of their opinion, as Dr. Campbell 
has done from what Ignatius says of there being " one altar, 
as there is one bishop ;" an expression, which no more 
proves the necessity of there being but one congregation in 
the diocese of a primitive bishop, than St. Paul's exhor- 
tation to " glorify God with one mind and one mouth ,"'^ 
would prove that all the congregations of Christians ought 
to have, as but one mind or sentiment, so literally, but one 
mouth to express it. 

Our Lecturer, however, is not satisfied with the support 
which, on this point, he thinks he has obtained from Igna- 
tius ; he even calls in to his aid the authority of one, to 
whom, he afterwards says, " he recurs the more willingly, 
because he is held the great apostle of high church." Hav- 
ing mentioned that "when the eucharist was celebrated, 
the whole people of the parish or bishopric, if we please 
to call it so, communicated in the same congregation, and 
all received the sacrament, if not from the hands of the 
bishop, at least under his eye ;"t he immediately adds-— 

* Rom XV. 6. 

f Nay, and partook also, according to Dr. Campbell, of one and the 
same loaf; for so we are told in his Translation of the Gospels, vol. ii, 
p. 450, where we meet with the following note on St. Mat. xxvi. 26. 
*' The loaf—rov oc^lov E. T. bread. Had it been a,{iov without the article, 
it might have been rendered either bread or a loaf. But as it has the ar- 
ticle, we must, if we would fully express the sense, say the loaf. Pro- 
bably on such occasions o?ie loaf, larger or smaller, according to the com- 
pany, was part of the accustomed preparation. This practice, at least 
ill the apostolic age, seems to have been adopted in the church, in 
commemorating Christ's death. To this it is very probable the apostle 
alludes, 1 Cor. x. 17. — '0% Ug oc^log^ h cruJiJ^a. oi 'z^oXXoi ^crixsv U yoc-^ iravm 
SK la Jvoj apliJ i^MsxofJ'VJ ; that is — because there is one haft ive, though 



General Defence of Episcopacy, lOT" 

" Hence it was that the setting up another altar within the 
limits of his parish, beside the one altar of the bishop, was 
considered as the great criterion of schism;"^ a crite- 
rion evidently drawn from those passages of the works of 
Cyprian, in which he describes a schismatic as one, " who, 
despising the bishops, and leaving the priests of God, dares 
to set up another altar, and to offer up different, and un- 
authorized prayers ;"'|' and again declares — that " no other 
altar can be erected, no new priesthood constituted, besides 
the one altar, and the one priesthood."J These, and such 
like passages from the works of Cyprian, if brought forward 
in support of Dr. Cambpell's opinion with respect to what 
he calls " parochial Episcopacy," must be treated with 
great violence, before they can be wrested to a purpose so 
different from that for which they were originally designed^ 
and which is uniformly displayed in the writings of the 
primitive fathers, every where exhibiting this plain and ob- 
vious truth, that the unity of the bishop, of the altar, and 
of prayer, is all founded on the common principle of the 

tnany, are one body, for tve all partake of the one loaf It is in the common 
translation — For we, being inmiy, are one bread and one body,- for we ari 
ell partakers of that one bread. Passing at present some other excep- 
tions, which might be made to this version, there is no propriety in say- 
ing one bread, more than in saying one v^ater or one ivine.^* And we 
jYiay add — there is as little propriety in building so much on the article 
m this passage of St, Matthew, when, in the parallel places of St. Mark, 
St. Luke, and St. Paul's first Epistle to the Corinthians, the word a^ov 
is used ivithout the article : Nor do we see much probability, that one loaf 
could have been found sufficently large, even for the three thousand soiilst 
■who are said (Acts ii. 41, 42.) to have " continued steadfastly in the 
apostolic breaking of bread," much less for the many thousands, who 
were soon after " added unto them." 

* Lecture vi. 

f " Contemptis Episcopis, et Dei sacerdotibus derelictis, constituere 
audet aliud altare, precem alteram illicitis vocibus sacere." — De Unitate 
Mcclesi<e. 

\ Aliud altare constitui aut sacerdotium novum fieri, prscter unum 
altare, et upura sacerdotium, non potest. — Cypr. epist. 43. 



198 General Defence of episcopacy. 

Unity of the Christian priesthood. And it has been justty 
observed, that no uninspired writer " ever so unlocked the 
evangelical secret of this catholic and Christian unity, as 
the inimitable Cyprian has done."* Of this we have a 
very striking proof in that admirable passage, which has 
been so *^often quoted by the writers on this subject: — 
*' The Episcopate is 07ie^ of which every bishop holds a 
part, so as to have a concern in, or be interested for, the 
whole. The church also is one, which by a fruitful increase 
grows up into a multitude of members j as the sun has many 
rays, yet but one fountain of light ; or as a tree may have 
many branches, yet but one root fixed deep in the earth ; or as 
when many streams descend from one fountain, they appear 
indeed divided in their number, yet all preserve the unitif 
of their original."f So is it, with respect to the unity of 
the Christian church, which, though distinguished in its 
principle by the several primitive expressions of one churchy 
one altar^ and one bishops will always be found to consist 
with as many churches, altars and bishops, as can be proved 
to derive their order, institution and authority from the 
same sacred source, the Bishop of souls, and Founder of 
the church ; the unity of whose divine power and spirit, 
diffused at first among the chosen twelve, is still preserved 



* See the Original Draught of the Primitive Churchy which contains a 
full and satisfactory answer to the Enquirer, iSfc. above mentioned. 

f ** Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur. 
Ecclesia quoque una est, quae in raultitudinem latius incremento fsecundi- 
tatis extenditur ; quo m®do solis multi radii, sed lumen unum ; et rami 
arboris multi, sed robur unum tenaci radice fundatum ; et cum de fonte 
uno rivi plurimi defluunt, numerositas licet diffusa videatur, exundantis 
copise largitate, unitas taraen servatur in origine." Cypr. lie Unitate 
Ecdesice. In a note on this passage, Mr. Marshall, the translator, observes, 
" that the words in solidutn are forensic, and allude to the case of divers 
contractors, each of whom was bound not only for his proportionable 
part, but if the rest failed, was to make good the whole." — By this ac- 
count, the bxshops will be found to hold their part of the EpiscopatCf as 
we say, conjunctly and severally. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 1 9^ 

among those who have regularly succeeded to them, in the 
commission, which they received from Christ. Hence it 
necessarily follows, that the unity of every regular congre- 
gation of Christians, consist in their having the ministerial 
offices, with which they are supplied, performed by a per- 
son duly authorized for that purpose, and acting under the 
appointment and direction of those who, as rightful 
bishops, have " authority given unto them in the church, to 
call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard." 

We have now taken notice of the principal arguments, 
to which Dr. Campbell has recurred ; for they have all been 
made use of before, to show, that the primitive bishop, in 
the period which he has fixed for his " parochial Episco- 
pacy," was no other than the pastor of a single congrega- 
tion or parish, with the presbyters assisting as his curates. 
And after all the pains he has taken to adjust his plan of 
the primitive bishopric to the modern presbyterian parish, 
we find him still obliged to own, that " the resemblance 
does not hold in every particular ; though," he says, " it 
plainly does in most ;" and then adds — " perhaps in some 
things, the case may bear a greater analogy to some highland 
parishes in this northern part of the island, wherein, by 
reason of their tenitorial extent, the pastor is under the 
necessity of having ordained itinerant assistants, whom he 
can send as occasion requires, to supply his place in the 
remote parts of his charge."* — The fitness of this analogy 
we shall in part admit, as it corresponds pretty nearly with 
the ideas which v/e have been taught to form of primitive 
Episcopacy; conceiving it to be almost in the Doctor's 
own words — " One ordained pastor having power to send 
out ordained assistants to supply his place, as occasion re- 
quires." But as Christianity began in cities, and popu- 
lous countries, and it was a long time before it reached 
such uncultivated tracts as are to be foimd in the northern 

* Lecture vii. 



200 General Defence of Episcopacy * 

parts of this island, it is chiefly with these populous settle- 
ments that we are at present concerned, such as the church, 
parish, or diocese of Jerusalem, where the bishop must 
have had many congregations of Christians to superintend, 
and therefore many presbyters acting under him in the 
discharge of their ministerial duties. 

Indeed, our Professor seems to admit as much, in that 
passage of his Lecture now before us, where he observes, 
that " as the whole of the bishop's parish generally received 
the symbols of Christ's body and blood, mediately or im- 
mediately from his hand, so they were, for the most part, 
baptized either bv him, or in his presence." Here the 
words " generallif and ^^ for the most part'"' plainly imply, 
that sometimes the case was otherwise, and a kind of similar 
acknowledgment is made by what is said of their " receiving 
the symbols mediately from the hand of the bishop." By 
this expression we cannot properly understand any thing 
else but the mediation or intervention of the presbyters, as 
his "" ordained assistants." And if receiving from their 
hands at the other end of such a capacious room as could 
contain thausands of communicants, according to the plan 
of our Professor, could be held the same as receiving from 
the hand of the bishop, why not at the other end of the 
street, and so on to any distance to which his Episcopal 
charge might extend ? It must be remembered, that we are 
presently alluding to the " parochial Episcopacy" of Jeru- 
salem, in which parish, however, from the account given 
of it in scripture, we must think it next to impossible, even 
had it been expedient, which at that time it certainly was 
not, that the three thousand, th^fve thousand, yea the many 
thousands of believers, or parishioners^ should meet in one 
place, for the purposes of public worship, or form but one 
congregation. 

It mav well be supposed, that in these variable times of 
the gospel, when the churches had now and then a little 
rest, and v/ere multiplied, but much oftener were scattered 



General defence of Episcopacy » 201 

by distress and persecution, there would be some Episcopal 
charges, whether we call them by the name of parish or 
diocese, where the bishop could easily meet with his whole 
flock in one place, and perform every part of his official 
duty to them in person. Dr. Campbell has taken care ta 
furnish us with an instance of this kind,^ in what h6 calls 
the " extensive diocese of Neocesaria," where Tillemont, 
he says, " hath shown from Basil and Gregory of Nyssa, 
both natives of Cappadocia^ that in the middle of the third 
qentury, there were no more than seventeen believers, who 
probably all resided in the citv ;" and then asks—" Could 
fewer be properly associated into one congregation ?"t But 
he has forgot to mention, what the same Basil and Gregory 
relate, whether Tillemont hath shown it or not, that the 
bishop assigned to the charge of Neocesaria, the famous 
Gregory Thaumaturgus, who had himself been converted 
by Origen, left at his death only seventeen pagans in all 
that " extensive diocese :" And the consequence, we are 
told, was, that the " zealous citizens pulled down their 
altars, temples and idols, and in every place built houses 
of prayer in the name of Christ."J 

* The historian Gibbon had mentioned the same instance, and almost 
in the same words.— See vol. ii. of the 8vo, edition of his History of the 
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire^ p. 360 ; where, after acknowledg- 
ing what, he says, " we may learn from the writings of Lucian, aphilo- 
sopher who had studied mankind, and who describes their manners in 
the most lively colours, that under the reign of Commodus, his native 
country of Pontus was filled with Epicureans and Christians,* he adds in 
a note, *• Christianity, however, must have been very unequally diflFused 
over Pontus, since, in the middle of the third century, there were na 
more than seventeen believers in the extensive diocese of Neo-Caesarea. 
See IM. de Tillemont, Memoires Ecclesiast tom. iv. p. 675, from Basil 
and Gregory of Nyssa, who were themselves natives of Cappadocia." 
This is one of many proofs that might be adduced of a peculiar " coin- 
cidence in sentiment" between our theological Professor, and that cele- 
brated historian, whose sceptical opinions are not likely to procure him 
any admiration among the real friends of Christianity. 

t Lecture vii. 

I Gregor. Nyssen, in Vit. Thaumat. torn. iii. p. 5&7. Paris ^dit. 1^38. 

26 



202 General Defence of EpiscopaCy, 

An earlier writer too than Gregory Nyssen, the same 
TertuUian, to whom Dr. Campbell has frequently referred, 
as favouring some of his sentiments, mentions the Chris- 
tians, even in his early age, as *' so numerous, as almost 
to constitute the greater part of every city ;"* and in his 
apology to the Roman magistrates, he does not hesitate to 
speak of the great multitudes of his profession, in these 
confident terms, " We are of yesterday ; yet every place 
is filled with us ; your cities, your islands, your forts, your 
corporations and councils, even the armies, tribes and 
companies, yea the palace, senate, and courts of justice ; 
the temples only have we left to you.—^Should we go off, 
and separate from you, you would stand amazed at your 
own desolation, be affrighted at your solitary state, the 
stagnation of your affairs, and the stupor of death, which 
had in a manner seized your city."")" What a strange ac- 
count must this have appeared to the magistrates of Rome, 
if their great city was found to contain, instead of such 
prodigious numbers, no more than a single congregation of 
Christians ? The same observation may be made on what 
Eusebius says, in general, of the Christian churches in 
every city and country, about the close of the apostolic 
age, when he uses such singular terms to express their 
amazing numbers, and compares " their thronged and 
crowded societies to grain heaped upon a barn floor."J It 
will be no easy matter to reconcile this report of a very well 

* Tanta hominum multitudo, pars pome major cujusque civitatis. Ter- 
tul. ad Scap. c. 2. 

f *• Hesterni sumus, et vestra omnia implevimus; urbes, insulas, cas- 
tella, municipia, conciliabula, castra ipsa, tribus, decurias, palatium, se- 
natum, forum; sola vobis reliquimus templa. St tanta vis hominum in 

aliquem orbis remoti sinum abrupissemus a vobis proculdubio expa- 

vissetis ad solltudinem vestram, ad silentium rerum, et stuporem quen- 
dam quasi mortui urbis. " Tertul. Apol. p. 35. cap. 37. 

I This gives but imperfectly the sense of the original, Ka* ci)\a> kvoc 

TrXrjSstj oi^^oot!^ sKKXwion cruvEfJrjJCE^av, Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. ii. c. 3. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 203 

informed and accurate author, with our Professor's imagi- 
nary calculation, by which he attempts to show that " one 
of the primitive bishoprics, in order to afford a congrega-. 
tion equal to that of a middling parish, must have been 
equal in extent to thirty parishes in this island." 

Having already discovered the extreme weakness of the 
materials, and want of solidity in the foundation, on which 
this strange position is built ; and being thereby sufficiently 
guarded against any conclusion that may be drawn from 
such doubtful and dangerous premises, we may be excused 
from following our learned Lecturer through all the minute 
descriptions of his parochial plan of Episcopacy ; especi- 
ally as, by his own confession, there is no complete resem- 
blance or conformity to it, in that established system, under 
the protection of which he made such a distinguished 
figure. The difference indeed, we could easily show in a 
number of instances, if it were not more our concern to 
defend the soundness of our own, than to expose the de- 
fects of other systems ; or if we may be allowed to adopt 
the language of him who has attacked us, and say — " It is 
neither our province, nor humour, to trace nonsense through 
all its dark and devious windings."* There is still, how- 
ever, one part of our Professor's specious theory, of which 
we cannot well omit to take some notice, as it seems to 
touch the main hinge of the controversy, and may serve as 
a farther specimen of the skill and address with which the 
other parts are constructed. 

The point to which I am alluding, occupies, in one way 
or other, all that remains of the seventh Lecture, part of 
which we have already considered, and is introduced by 
the Lecturer's " returning to the administration of religious 
ordinances in those primitive parishes," which he had been 
describing. After having told us, that " the presbyters 

* See Dr. Campbell's application of this remark to the pious and 
eminently learned Mr. Henry Dodwell, Lecture iv. 



204 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

executed certain ministerial offices, in those parts of the 
parish to which the bishop found it reasonable to send 
them, and also assisted him in the public offices of religion; 
that when he was sick, or otherwise necessarily absent, 
they supplied his place, and as the charge of the parish 
was eminently devolved upon him, they acted in all the mir 
nisterial duties by his direction, or at least with his permis- 
sion ;" he immediately adds — " The only question of mo-? 
inent that has been raised on this head is, whether by his 
order or allowance, they could exercise every part of the 
pastoral office as well as the bishop, or whether there were 
some things, such as ordaining others to the ministry, 
which even his commands could not empower them to do?" 
On this veiy important question, the learned Professor 
gives his own opinion directly in these words—" As the 
power of the bishops arose, and that of the presbyters sunk 
gradually, I am disposed to think, that in the course of 
two centuries, or even a centuiy and a half, there was a 
considerable difference in this respect, in the state of things, 
at the beginning, and at the end. Towards the conclusion 
of that period, I imagine, it became very unusual for a 
bishop to delegate this, which was ever looked upon as 
the most sacred, and most momentous trust, to his pres- 
byters. The transition is very natural from seldom to 
never, and in our ways of judging, the transition is as na- 
tural from what never is done, to what cannot lawfully be 
done."^ 

Now, what is all this, but mere declamation, or a fan- 
ciful train of reasoning, founded upon gratuitous assump- 
tions, and confirmed by the author's own " imaginings^ 
and dispositions to think'''' so and so, without any thing of- 
fered in the way of proof, or even of illustration? The 
period which he has assigned for the operation of his " na- 
tural transition," we cannot help thinking, is very ambi- 

* Lecture vii. 



General Defence of Episcopacy * 205 

guously defined. He is willing to reduce it to " a century 
and a half,'* and yet finds a considerable difference in the 
state " of things at the beginnings and at the end." That 
period undoubtedly began with the birth of Christ ; so that 
the thirty-three years of his life must be struck out of the 
calculation, as must also be the subsequent years to the 
death of St. John, the apostle ; and then the " course of a 
century and a half," will be reduced to little more than half 
a century, which is rather a short period for effecting such 
9 considerable change as our author alludes to, in the go- 
vernment of the church. When he tells us — ** that the 
power of the bishops arose, and that of the presbyters sunk 
gradually;" should he not have mentioned more particu- 
larly, for the information of his pupils, what it was that 
thus raised the bishops and sunk the presbyters, even in 
a gradual manner? There were then no flattering Con- 
stantines, — ^none of those imperial edicts, which he in- 
veighs so bitterly against, to create or support such a dan- 
gerous ascendancy in the first of these ecclesiastical orders 
above the second. If it was entirely owing to *' seniority, 
or superior merit, or distinguished talents," as our Lec- 
turer seems to think " probable," what an insignificant race 
must those presbyters have been, none of whom could ever 
be found to possess " merit or talents" sufficient to pre- 
serve their power from sinking, or rather being totally 
swallowed up in that gulph of Episcopal dominion, from 
which it was never to rise again t 

Our author indeed " imagines," (but without assigning 
any ground for such an imagination) that towards the con- 
clusion of his " century and a half," it became very unusual 
for a bishop " to delegate the trust of ordination to his 
presbyters ;" and yet we shall soon find him endeavouring 
to fix this unusual practice, even upon " the great apostle 
of High-church himself," a whole century after the period 
to which he is here referring. But the strangest inconsist- 
ency, and most illogical piece of reasoning in all that portion 



206 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

of Dr. Campbell's Lectures now under our consideration, 
is that which follows in these words — " We know, that 
some time after the period to which I have here confined 
myself, ordination by presbyters was prohibited, and de- 
clared null by ecclesiastical canons. But the very prohibi- 
tions themselves, the very assertions of those whom they 
condemned as heretics, prove the practice, then probably 
wearing, but not quite worn out."* And it is well, we 
say, for those who maintain the necessity of Episcopal 
ordination, that its modern rival, ordination by presbyters, 
was prohibited so early, as even our Lecturer's vague 
expression must mean, " if it mean any thing." — But we 
know not well what opinion to give of the manner in which 
he accounts for these prohibitions, and which appears liable 
to some objection in the terms made use of to define it, 
and much more in the consequences that may be deduced 
from it* 

If by the terms, in which it is expressed, we are to 
understand that " the prohibitions themselves prove the 
practice to be then probably wearing, but not quite wont 
cwif," we must object to that sort of evidence, which esta- 
blishes no sort of connection between the proof and the 
thing to be proved : and we might say, on much better 
ground, if probability be all the point in question, that the 
prohibitions rather prove the practice to be thtn probably 
wearing in^ and beginning to require correction. — But if it 
be the practice itself which is meant to be proved, not only 
by the prohibitions themselves, but " by the verv assertions 
of those whom they condemned as heretics," might it not 
be expected, that our Professor would have let his pupils 
know, whether the authors of these " assertions," some of 
whom he ought to have named, were really heretics, or 
only condemned as such, by those who had prohibited the 
practice, to which he was here referring ? His statement 

* Lecture vii. 



General Defence of Episcopacy » 207 

of the case, on the contrary, is dark and dubious, where 
the nature of the subject required that his sentiments should 
have been delivered in clear and explicit terms. He was 
sensible, no doubt, of the ticklish ground on which he 
was treading, and, therefore, contrived to make use of lan- 
guage, not so plain, and unequivocal, as might have been 
looked for. Yet even to insinuate that the assertions of 
condemned heretics serve to prove their innocence, or the 
lawfulness of that, which they were condemned for main- 
taining, is a tenet rather of dangerous consequence, and 
not such as might be expected from an established theo- 
logical chair. Did the assertions of the Arian heretics, 
when condemned by the council of Nice, prove their doc- 
trine to be then only " wearing, but not quite worn out?" 
Were there no novelties in these old times, which, on 
their very first appearance, were stigmatized as heresies ? 
And might not this fancy of admitting " ordination by 
presbyters," have been but a novelty, when it was first pro- 
hibited, at least for any thing that Dr. Campbell has pro- 
duced to show the antiquity of its origin, or the continu- 
ance of its practice ? Or did the church, so early as the 
period " to which he has here confined himself," make 
canons against apostolic institution, and primitive usage, 
when " wearing, but not quite worn out ?" These are 
questions, which, connected as they evidently are with 
" the most sacred and momentous trust," it was the busi- 
ness of our learned Lecturer to have discussed with a de- 
gree of seriousness and attention, suitable to the dignity 
and importance of the subject, and not to have left his 
hearers without any other impression on their minds, than 
what arises from the authority of a great name^ which, he 
himself has repeatedly told us, '^ has greater influence on 
the opinions of the generality of men, than most people 
are aware of." 

In the course of our inquiries into the ecclesiastical his- 
tory of the first three or four centuries, we meet with an 



20S General Defence of Episcopacy* 

instance of one Colluthus, a presbyter of Alexandria, vrho^ 
pretending to have been promoted to the office of a bishop, 
began to encroach on the Episcopal power of ordination, 
but was soon brought to see his error, and having renounced 
his schism, was again admitted to communion as a presby- 
ter. This happened about the beginning of the fourth cen- 
tury, and so far from being considered as a " practice then 
wearing out," it is expressly mentioned as xh^frst attempt 
of that kind. Some time after we read of another presby- 
ter, Aerius, who, as a judicious writer observes, " seek- 
ing to be made a bishop, could not brook that another was 
preferred before him ; and, therefore, when he saw himself 
unable to rise to that greatness, which his ambitious pride 
did affect, his way of revenge was to try, what wit, being 
sharpened with envy and malice, could do, in raising a new 
and seditious opinion, that the superiority which bishops 
had, was a thing which they should not have, there being 
no necessary distinction between them and presbyters."^ 
For holding and striving to propagate this new opinion, 
which Epiphanius imputes to his ignorance of the scrip- 
tures, Aerius was not only branded as a heretic^ but con- 
sidered as no other than a madman ; for " how was it possi** 
ble," said those who argued against him, " that he should 
constitute or ordain a presbyter, who had no authority to 
impose hands in ordination ?"']' 

In opposition, however, to these facts (though facts are 
usually reckoned stubborn things) our Lecturer produces 
some extracts from the works of contemporary writers, 
sufficient, as he thinks, to establish his own opinion ; and 
" that about the middle of the third century, the presbyters 
were still considered as vested with the power of conferring 



* See Hooker's Ecclesiastical Politic y book vii. p. 25. 

Epiphanius Hsercs Ixxv p, 908— -as quoted by Archbishop Potter in his 
Discourse on Church Government, p. 292. 



General Defence of Episcopabtji ^09 

orders," he says, " has been plausibly argued from an ex-' 
pression of Firmilian, in his letter to Cyprian ;" which ex- 
pression is thus translated by the " plausible arguer," whom 
he^ no doubt, had in his eye.*—" All power and grace is 
constituted in the church, where seniors preside, who have 
the power of baptizing, confirming and ordaining."']' Now, 
says Dr. Campbell, " that by majores natu, in Latin" (here 
rendered seniors)^ " is meant the same with 9rpEcr/5y7£poi in 
Greek" (or presbyters), " of which it is indeed a literal ver- 
sion, can scarcely be thought questionable. Besides, the 
phrase so exactly coincides with that of Tertullian, who 
says — Probati praasident seniores— -approved elders preside, 
•—as to make the application/ if p>ossible, still clearer. "J 
Yet we cannot help thinking, that more illustration is still 
wanting ; and that no person, who reads with attention the 
whole of this epistle of Firmilian's to Cyprian, and pro- 
perly considers the nature of the subject on which he wrote^ 
can have any doubt, that by the " seniors, who preside in 
the church," he certainly meant the bishops, as being the 
only presidents, who were acknowledged to " have the 
power of confirming and ordaining," as well as of bap- 
tizing, and to whom he plainly refers a little after, when 
mentioning St. Paul as surely " not inferior to the bishops 
of whom he had been speaking."|| It is equally certain, 
that by Tertullian's " approved presidents," could only be 
meant the bishops or heads of the several churches within 
the Roman empire ; since he was clearly of opinion, that 
the apostles had placed bishops in all the churches which 
they had planted, and adduced those of Smyrna and Rome 

* See the Enquiry into the Constitution, 13'c. (^ the Primitive Church, so 
frequently copied by Dr. Campbell. 

f " Qj.iando omnis potestas et gratia in ecclesia constituta sit, ubi pre- 
sident majores natu, qui et baptizandi, et manum imponendi, et ordi- 
nandi possident potestatem." Cyprian. Epist. 75. 

\ L.ecture vii. 

li '• Nisi si his Episcopis de quihis nunc, minor fuit Paulus." 

27 



j,f-<. f.-v;.- 



SIO General Defence of Episcopacy i 

as instances, although he saw no occasion for caUing theniiE 
by that name, in the apology which he was now offering 
to the Roman governors. 

But what we think most surprising in all that part of Dr. 
Campbell's Lectures, now more immediately before us, is 
the readiness with which he recars to the authority of Cy- 
prian. — 'This cannot so well be accounted for, as by ob- 
serving, that the only passage which he quotes from that 
venerable writer, as favouring the validity of ordination by 
presbyters, was made use of, for the same purpose, by his 
great friend and oracle, the author of the " Enquiry into 
the Constitution^ ^c. of the Primitive Church^"^ — We find 
him arguing just as Dr. Campbell has done, from part of 
a letter addressed by Cyprian to his presbyters and dea* 
cons at Carthage, in which " he, in the most earnest and 
pressing terms, intreats them, during his absence, to dis- 
charge what was incumbent both on themselves, and on 
him, in such a manner, as that nothing might be wanting, 
either as to discipline or diligence.''^ Now, says our 
Professor,"^—*' is it to be supposed, that he would have so 
expressly enjoined them, without exception or limitation, to 
discharge the duties of his function, as well as their own, if 
neither presbyters nor deacons could do any thing in ordi- 
nation, that part^ which was the chief of all ?"J And we 
may ask in return, if ordination was included in those du- 
ties, which they were to discharge, is it to be supposed, 
that he would not have made an exception with respect to 
his deacons; as they could have no pretensions to the power 
of ordaining, even on Dr. Campbell's principles, who had 
just before been observing, " that there was no occasion 
for making canons against ordination by deacons, or by 

* See the Rnquiry, Isfc. p. 62, 

•]■ " Quoniam mihi inreresse nunc non permittit loci conditio, peto vos 
pro fide et religione ve&tra, fungairuni illic et vestris partibus et meis, ut 
nihil vel ad disciplinara, vel ad diligentiam desit," Cypr, Epist. 5. 

:j: Lecture vii. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, .- 211 

laymen, who did not pretend to such a right ?" Yet here 
he adds — " Might it not be justly thought, that if Cyprian 
meant to except ordination, he would have given them 
some hint in this letter, what method, in case of any va- 
cancy in their presbytery, (which during his absence, would 
be doubly incommodious) they should take, to get it 
quickly and properly supplied ?" And we may easily dis- 
cover the reason, why no such hint was given, by a careful 
perusal of the letter itself, which was evidently written for 
the sake of recommending to his clergy a quiet and prudent 
behaviour under their present distress, as well as a charitable 
attention to the necessities of those who are suffering for 
their faith in Christ, but without any view to the case of a 
vacancy in their presbytery, or the most proper method of 
getting it supplied. 

This very case, however, or any thing similar to it, we 
find sufficiently provided for in another of C}^rian's Let- 
ters, addressed to two of his colleagues, Caldonius and 
Herculanus, neighbouring bishops, and to two of his own 
presbyters, Rogatianus and Numidicus, appointing these 
four " his vicegerents or deputies, to inquire into the ages, 
conditions and merits of the brethren ; that he whose 
proper charge or business it was, to promote men to ec- 
clesiastical offices, might be well informed about them, and 
so promote none but such as were worthy, and humble and 
meek."* By such an ample deputation as this, those en- 
trusted with it, including in their number two of the Epis- 
copal order, were sufficiently authorized to supply what- 
ever vacancy might happen in any of the ecclesiastical of- 
fices, within the diocese of Carthage, during the unavoid- 
able absence of its proper bishop and governor, who, we 



• " Cumquc ego vos pro me vicarios miserim — ut states eorum, et 
conditiones, et merita discenieretis, utjam, ego, cui cura incumbit, om- 
ne.s optime nossem, et dignos, atque huniiles et mites, ad ecclesiastjcK 
administrationis officia pronioverem." Cypr. Epist. 41. 



212 General Defence of Episcopacy^ 

see, speaks of himself in the singular number, as the per^ 
son who had the power of appointing his subordinate ofli-? 
cers, and founds that power on his having the care of the 
church of Carthage committed to him. 

The same sentiment we find expressed in another of his 
letters to his presbyters and deacons, and to all his people, 
which he begins by telling them, that " though in all cleri- 
cal ordinations he had been accustomed to consult them 
beforehand, and to examine the manners and merits of 
every one with common advice,"* yet in the instance 
which he was then going to ipention, he had thought pro-? 
per to depart from his usual practice, by ordaining a per- 
son without any such previous consultation, and now inti- 
mated what he had done, in the common style used by 
superiors on such occasions. This he repeats in his next 
letter concerning arjother ordination of the same kind, by 
desiring his presbyters and deacons, and all his people, to 
take notice^ that though on account of their youth, he had 
appointed these petsons only to an inferior office for the 
time, he " yet designed them for the honour of the pres'? 
byterate, and to sit with him as his counsellors, as soon as 
their years would admit of that promotion."t All which 
plainly shows, that Cyprian considered himself, in his 
Episcopal character, as vested with the sole power of or- 
dination within his district ; and it will not be easy to dis- 
cover, in any part of his works, the least intimation of his 
sharing that power with his presbyters, far less of his ad- 
mitting, that they had sufficient right to exercise it, as 
having equal authority with himself. On the contrar}^, we 
fmd him on all occasions vindicating and strenuously as- 
serting the supreme power of the bishops in this, as well 

* " In ordinationibus clericis solemus vos ante consulere, et mores, ac 
merita singulorum communi coosilio ponderare." See the whole of Cy- 
prian's 38th epistle to his presbyters and deacons, and to all his people. 

f C?eterum presbyterii honorem, designasse nos illis jam sciatis — se^- 
suris nobiscum, provectis ft corroboratis annis suis. Epist. 39. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, »13 

as ia every other matter, connected with the care and go« 
vernment of the church. 

This is particularly observable in one of his letters writ- 
ten to those unhappy persons, who, by sacrificing to idols, 
had fallen off from the communion of the church, and after- 
wards became indecently importunate, even with insolent 
clamour, to be restored to it. After stating to them the 
manner in which the frame of the church, and the autho- 
rity of its bishops, were constituted by our blessed Lord, 
whose precepts we ought to revere and obey, he adds — 
** Thence, in the course of time, and by regular succession 
downwards, the ordination of bishops, and the constitution 
of the church, are transmitted in such a manner, as that the 
church being built upon the bishops, all her public acts or 
affairs may be ordered by them as the chief rulers. — Where- 
fore, since this is God's appointment, I cannot but wonder 
at the boldness and insolence of certain persons, who, in 
writing to me, have called themselves a church, when a 
church is only to be found in the bishop, the clergy, and 
the faithful, or steady Christians."^ Such is the reason- 
ing made use of by this admirable writer, to show the ne- 
cessity of maintaining communion with the bishop, as the 
means of preserving that principle of unity in the church, 
which is essential to its very existence. And this we find 
him again recommending very strongly, in a letter ad- 
dressed to all his people on the breaking out of a lamenta- 
ble schism in his diocese. Having first put them in mind, 
that " God is one, and Christ is one, and the church is one, 
and the Episcopal chair is one," he then points to the appli- 
cation, and shows what ought to be the consequence of all 

• " Inde per temporura, et successionum vices, Episcoponim ordina- 
tio, et ecclesias ratio decurrit, lit ecclesia super Episcopos constituatur, et 
omnis actus ecclesiK per eosdem prxpositosgubernetur. Cum hoc itaque 
divina lege fundatum sit, iniror quosdam audaci temeritate, sic mihi scri- 
bere voluisse, ut ecclesise nomine literas facerent ; quanda ecclesia in Epis- 
copo, et clero, etin omnibus stantibus sit constituta." Cypr, Epist. 33. 



214 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

this unity, in the most earnest and affectionate terms.— 
*' Ye are brethren," sa5's he, " let no man make you wander 
from the ways of the Lord : Ye are Christians, let no man 
rend you from the gospel of Christ : Let no man take off 
from the church, the sons of the church : Let them who 
have a mind to perish, perish by themselves : Let them 
alone continue out of the church, who have departed from 
the church : Let them alone not be with the bishops, who 
have rebelled against the bishops."* 

But it was not to " his people," or laity only, that Cyprian 
directed these, and such like admonitions, warning them of 
the danger of despising the due exercise of ecclesiastical 
authority ; he spake the same language to his clergy, and 
showed himself equally desirous of enforcing on the inferior 
orders of the ministry, a becoming regard to that sacred au- 
thority, when thus exercised in the way of Christ's appoint- 
ment. Having been informed of the ill usage, which one of 
his contemporary bishops had received from a turbulent and 
disorderly deacon, he recommended a proper exertion of 
the Episcopal authority, as the most likely way of bringing 
the delinquent to a just sense of his duty; observing at the 
same time, in the letter which he wrote on the occasion, that 
*' the deacons ought to remember, that our Lord himself 
chose apostles, that is, bishops and governors ; whereas the 
apostles, after their Lord's ascension, appointed for them- 
selves deacons, to be ministers of the church, and of their 
Episcopal office ; so that, if we durst do any thing against 
God, who hath made us bishops, they might in like manner 
oppose us, by whose authority they have been made dea- 
cons."'!* 

* " Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et una ecclesia, et cathedra una 
— Nemo, vos fratres, errare a Domini viis faciat : Nemo vos Christia- 
nos ab evangelio Ciiristi rapiat: Nemo filios ecclesiae de ecclesia toUat ; 
Pereant sibi soli, qui perire voluerunt. Extra ecclesiam soli remaneant, 
qui de ecclesia recesserunt. Soli cpm Episcopis non sint, qui contra Epis^ 
copos rebellarunt." Cypr. Epist. 43. 

f " Meminisse autum Diaconi debent, quoniam apostolos, id est Epis* 
copos ct prsepositos, Dominiis elegit ; diaconos autem post ascensum 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 21 



f 



• The deacons, however, were not the only order of church 
officers, whom Cyprian has described as placed in a sub- 
ordinate capacity, and acting under the authority of the 
bishops. Even the presbyters also, though always men- 
tioned by this venerable prelate in terms of the most affec- 
tionate regard, and whom he so often calls his fellow-pres- 
byters^ and points out their duty, as partners with him in 
the great work of the ministry, are yet as constantly put in 
remembrance, that nothing was to be done by them, as 
part of that work, but with the allowance and consent of 
their ecclesiastical superior ; much less was any thing to 
be attempted in despite of his just authority, and from an 
avowed spirit of opposition to it. That any such attempt 
was considered in the days of Cyprian as highly blameable, 
and worthy of censure, is evident from the manner in 
which he expressed himself,. when obliged to restrain the 
arrogance of some of his own presbyters, who, during his 
absence, occasioned by the violence of persecution, had 
evinced a desire to take the whole Episcopal power into 
their own hands, and to manage the affairs of the church, 
as if they had been independent on any superior. Deeply 
sensible of the necessity of repressing such a daring spirit 
of disobedience, he tells them very plainly, that he had for 
a long time taken no notice of their unruly conduct, hoping 
by his forbearance to have obliged them to be quiet ; but 
their excessive presumption would not suffer him to be 
silent any longer, lest the people committed to his care 
should suffer through his inattention. " For what," says 
he, " have we not to fear from the displeasure of our Lord, 
when some of our presbyters, neither mindful of the rules 
of the gospel, nor of their own station in the church, and 
making no account of the authority of the bishop, who is 

Domini in cselo, apostoli sibi constituerunt Episcopaius sui, et ecclesise 
ministros. Qjiod si nos aliquid audere contra Deum possumus, qui Epis- 
copos facit ; possint et contra nos audere diaconi, a quibus fiunt." Cypv. 
Epist. 3. 



216 General Defence of Episcopacy. 

at present set over them, or even of that future day, which 
shall bring every work into judgment, have done what was 
never attempted before, and, in defiance of their superior, 
have usurped the whole power, which he has a right to ex* 
ercise ?""* He therefore concludes his letter with assuring 
them, that if they still persist in such factious and disor- 
derly practices, he will use the authority which the Lord 
had entrusted to him, and prohibit their future discharge of 
any ministerial duties. 

In all this, we cannot but discover abundant evidence of 
the subordination both of deacons and presbyters to their 
bishop ; and must be convinced by so many undoubted tes- 
timonies, that this was a principle firmly believed in the 
Cyprianic age, and received as a part of that apostolic doc- 
trine, which was to be handed down in the Christian 
church, to the end of the world. Were we to cite but the 
most striking passages from the works of St. Cyprian, which 
serve to establish the belief of this principle, it would be 
only repeating what was done in a most distinct and judi- 
cious manner, about a century ago, by a learned writer of 
this country ,t who, soon after the publication of this work, 
was promoted to the Episcopate, on the same primitive 
footing as that on which was placed the authority of the 
bishop of Carthage. In maintaining that authority, we 
have seen this venerable martyr standing forth as its zea- 
lous advocate, under the most trying and difficult circum- 

* " Quid enim non periculum metuere debemus de ofFensa Domini, 
quando aliqui de presbyteris, nee evartgelii, nee loci sui memores, sed ne- 
que futurum Domini judicium, neque nunc sibi prsepositum Episcopum 
Gogitantes, quod nunquam omnino sub antecessoribus factum est, cum 
contumelia et contemptu propositi, totum sibi vindicent." Cypr. Epist. 
16. 

t See the Principles of the Cyprianic Age zvith regard to Episcopal Povxr 
and jurisdiction, c5'c. — and a Vindication of that Discourse, &c. both by 
the Rev. John Sage, who, before the revolution, was one of the minis- 
ters of Glasgow, and in 1705, was consecrated a bishop of the ScotcK 
church. 



General Defence of Episcopacy » 217 

stances, and when his zeal in supporting the character 
with which he had been invested, was the certain means of 
increasing the dangers to which he was exposed, and plac- 
ing him in the very front of the battle, to be more directly 
aimed at, by the fury of his enemies. Yet, with all this 
malice and opposition staring him in the face, he never 
shrunk from the arduous task, which the dignity of his 
office imposed upon him. Through evil report and good 
report, he persevered in a steady resolution to discharge, 
with vigour and firmness, the sacred trust committed to him ; 
and, in every part of his writings, we find his theory and 
practice uniformly consistent, with respect to the subordi- 
nation which had always distinguished the Christian mi- 
nistry. On this very point, therefore, it is the more sur- 
prising that such a man as Dr. Campbell should endeavour 
to represent him as at variance with himself! a misrepre- 
sentation, for which we cannot otherwise account, than by 
adopting the Doctor's own opinion, that " when once unhap- 
pily the controversial spirit has gotten possession of a man, 
his object is no longer truth, but victory." We are not 
ashamed, however, to stand up for Cyprian's self-consis- 
tency, or to rank ourselves on his side of the question now 
under our consideration, even although it should be held 
up to ridicule, under the contemptuous, but mistaken epi- 
thet, of High-church ; which, when our Professor thought 
proper to apply as a mark of scorn, in the case before us, 
he might have reflected that those whom he wished to makq 
the objects of this vulgar sneer, look higher up for their 
apostleship than even to Cyprian, great and venerable as 
they know him to have been, and much as they esteem the 
support which he has afforded to the cause of ecclesiastical 
unity and order.^ 

• It was no doubt very pleasing to Dr. Campbell to find his sarcastic 
account of the venerable Cyprian, as the " apostle of Jligh-chtirch ." so 
happily coifwiding with the opinion of a writer, whose work he admired 
as " a most masterly performance." In the History of the Dttcline and 

28 



218 General Defence of Epucopacij. 

Our Lecturer, indeed, looks not so high for support to 
his cause ; but, passing quickly over the authority of Cy- 
prian, " eminent" as he calls it, he hastens to produce again 
that of Hilary, the Roman deacon, with more hope, no 
doubt, of finding a friend in him, whom he had quoted be^ 
fore with approbation, as " a man of erudition and discern- 
ment." — In giving our opinion of the sentiments ascribed to 
this writer, we could not but take notice of the partial man- 
ner in which his words v/ere extracted from his writings, to 
give some ground for the forced construction that was to be 
put upon them : And the same observation may be applied 
to the quotation now before us, wherein this commentator is 
represented as inferring from a passage in the third chapter 

• of the first Epistle to Timothy, that there is no difference 
between the ordination of a bishop and of a presbyter, and 

-that '*• Timothy himself was ordained a presbyter, but 
because he had not another before him, was, therefore, a 

Fall of the JRoman Empire, after being told, that the ambitious " Cypriafi 
-ruled with the most absolute sway the ehureh of Carthage, and the pro- 
vincial synods," we find his conduct ascribed to a motive as unworthy 
of his character as of the author who could thus argue — " Cyprian had 
renounced those temporal honours, which, it is probable, he would never 
. have obtained ; but the acquisition of such absolute command over the 
.consciences and understanding of a congregation, hov/ever obscure or 
.despised by the world, is more truly grateful to the pride of the human 
heart, than the possession of the most despotic power, imposed by arms 

• and conquest on a rehictant people." After such an account of his con- 
duct in life, we need not be surprised at the following base insinuation 

• v/ith respect to his feelings under the prospect of a violent death — " It 
was in the choice of Cyprian either to die a martyr, or to live an apos- 
tate : but on that choice depended the alternative of honour or infamy. 
Could we suppose that the bishop of Carthage had employed the profes- 
sion of the Christian faith only as the instrument of his avarice or ambi- 
tion, it was still incumbent on him to support the character which be 
had assumed; and if he possessed the smallest degree of manly fortitude, 
rather to expose himself to the most cruel tortures, than by a singieact 
to exchange the reputation of a whole life, for the abhorrence of his 
■Christian bi-ethren, and the contempt of the Gentile world." See Gib- 
■bon's History, (Jfc. 8vo. edit, vol.ii. p. 352,435, 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 219 

bishop." On this our Professor observes — " Nothing can 
be more evident, than that the whole distinction of the 
Episcopate is here ascribed to seniority in the ministry, 
without either election, or special ordination. When the 
bishop died, the senior colleague succeeded of course ; as 
to ordination, it was the same in both, and bishop meant 
no more, than first among the presbyters, or the senior 
presbyter."'^' But if this be really the meaning of Hilary's 
words, we must be allowed to say, that he expressed him- 
self very improperly, when in the same passage he assigned 
this as the reason, why there was " one ordination of a hi' 
shop and a presbyter ; because they were both priests"— 
and there could be no necessity for a double appointment 
to the same office, as it was undoubtedly by the same ordi- 
nation, that both bishop and presbyter were promoted to 
the order of priesthood. — " But," as he immediately adds 
— ." the bishop is the first or chief priest ;" the first, not 
merely in point of seniority, but in order and authority, 
such as the chief priest was in the Jewish church. For 
though he was a priest, yet all of that order were not high- 
priests, nor did they succeed to that office in the way of 
seniority ; just so — says Hilary, " though every bishop be 
a presbyter, yet every presbyter is not a bishop i"^ Or, as 
our Professor might have said to his pupils, — " though 
every moderator be a minister, yet every minister is not a 
moderator," nor does he *' succeed to the office of course, 
as senior colleague ;" for if we are not mistaken, the choice 
generally fails on the junior colleagues ; a very wide depar- 
ture indeed from what Dr. Campbell makes Hilary describe 

* I^ecture vH. 

f The whole passage from Hilary, as quoted by Dr. Campbell, is in 
these words : " Post Episcopum tamen diaconi ordinationem subjecit. 
Quare ? Nisi quia Ep scopi er presbyteri una ordinatio est ? uterque enim 
sacerdos est. Sed Episcopus primus est, ut omnis Episcopus presbyter 
sit, non omnis presbyter Episcopus. Hie enim Episcopus est qui inter 
presbyteros primus est. Uenique Tunoiheum presbyterum ordinatum 
signiticat, sed quia ante se alterum non habebat, Episcopus erat." 



^^ General Defence of Episcopacy, 

to have been the primitive practice, and to give weight tot 
his authority, points him out as " a respectable member of 
the Roman presbytery in those days." How far he was 
thought to deserve that character, and what respect was 
paid to his authority by some of the other writers of ••* those 
days," may be easily discovered from the ridiculous and con- 
temptible light in which he is represented by the very next 
*' witness whom our Lecturer adduces, a man," he says, 
" who had more erudition than any person then in the 
church, the greatest linguist, the greatest critic, the greatest 
antiquary of them all." 

This is no other than the presbyter Jerome, who wrote 
about the end of the fourth, and beginning of the fifth cen- 
tiuy, and whose " eminent authority" requires particular 
consideration, " because," according to Dr. Campbell's 
distinction, " he is held the great apostle of low-church*^ 
So much indeed is his authority built upon, in support of 
ecclesiastical parity, that the most powerful champion who 
has ever yet stood forth in its defence, after composing a 
voluminous work against the Episcopal government of the 
church, sent it abroad into the world under the title of-*^ 
^ An Apology for the opinion of Jerome."^ As it is from 
this armory that all the subsequent adversaries of Episco- 
pacy have borrowed the principal weapons, with which they 
have appeared in the field, and fitted themselves for the 
combat; we may well suppose, that our learned opponent 

* See D. Blondel's " Apologia pro sentcntia Jlieronyvii." Amstel. 
1646, as to which Dr. Monro, in his Eivjuiry into the JVew Opinions, ijfc. 
very justly observes, that — " when the government and revenues of the 
church were sacrilegiously invaded by atheists and enthusiasts under 
Oliver Cromwell, the learned Blondel employed all his skill to make the 
ancients contradict themselves, and all contemporary records ; and though 
every line that he had written, with the least colour of argument, had 
been frequently answered and exposed, it was still thought enough for 
the enemies of Episcopacy to say that Blondel had written a book of 
549 pages, to show that Jerome was of their opinion, and had sufficiently 
proved that this ancient Monk vvas a Presbyterian.^^ 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 221 

in this place, would not fail to wield these weapons with 
his wonted dexterity ; and so as to make them yield every 
possible aid to the cause which he had undertaken to de- 
fend, while thus employed in fighting his way through 
what he calls " the progress of the hierarchy." With this 
view, we now find him bringing forward, in what he, no 
doubt, thought the most hostile form, " the testimony" of 
Jerome, as attacking Episcopacy from one particular point, 
" the practice, which," he says, " had long subsisted at 
Alexandria ;" and then gives us the passage in Jerome's own 
words, from his epistle to Evagrius, mentioning that " from 
the days of St. Mark, the evangelist, down to those of the 
bishops Heracla and Dionysius, the presbyters of Alexan- 
dria always chose one from among themselves, and placing 
him in a higher seat, named him bishop, as an army would 
make an emperor, or deacons choose an arch-deacon."*" 

This is the famous story, respecting the supposed custom 
of the church of Alexandria, which, from the days of 
Blondel, has been eagerly laid hold of, to show, what Dr# 
Campbell calls — " the sense and strength of the argument" 
arising from it, that there can be no essential difference 
between the order of bishop and that of presbyter ; since, 
to make a bishop, nothing more was necessary at first (and 
of this practice the church of Alexandria remained long an 
example,) than the nomination of his fellow presbyters ; and 
no ceremony of consecration was required, but what was 
performed by them, and consisted chiefly in placing him in 
a higher seat, and saluting him bishop."t We know well 
where it is, that every thing which looks like ceremony in 
the holy offices of religion, has been long exploded j but we 

* " Alexandria: a Marco evangelista usque ad Heradam et Dionysium 
Episcopos, pvesbyteri semper unum ex se electum, in excelsiori gradu 
collocatum, Episcopum nominabant, quomodo si exercitus imperatorem 
facial, aut diaconi eligant de se quem'industrium noverint, et archidiaco- 
num vocent." Hieron. Ep. ad Evagrium. 

f Lecture vii. 



222 General Defence of Episcopacy. 

cannot so readily discover, by what means the sacred rite of 
' ordination can be excluded from the account given by Je- 
rome of the practice at Alexandria, when the words imme- 
diately following the passage just now quoted, so directly 
refer to that very rite, and are introduced with the same 
connecting particle, on which our Professor appears to lay 
some stress — " For'^ even at Alexandria, — " what does a 
bishop, which a presbyter may not do, excepting ordina- 
tion .^"^ — " True," says he, " Jerome admits this as a dis- 
tinction that then actually obtained ; but the whole preced- 
ing part of his letter was written to evince, that from the 
beginning it was not so." And we may say, it is equally 
true, that between " writing to evince," and " actual evinc- 
ing," there is a very material difference, as frequently ap- 
pears from the latter being by no means the consequence of 
the former. 

As a proof of this, let us only try how Dr. Campbell's 
paraphrase of the words he had quoted from Jerome, will 
bear its necessary connection with the perplexing question 
which immediately follows them. — " There was nothing," 
says the Doctor, " at first requisite to make a bishop, but 
what was performed by his fellow presbyters, no other ordi- 
nation, than their election; yor," adds Jerome, — " what does 
a bishop which a presbyter may not do, excepting' ordina- 
tion ,^" But why except ordination, or deny the power of 
it to the presbyters, if no such thing was necessary, or ever 
required in the making of a bishop? It is evident, therefore, 
that Jerome not only " admits the superiority of bishops in 
the exclusive privilege of ordaining," which Dr. Campbell 
acknowledges to be " true," but that he also admits it to. 
have been so from the beginning, at least from the time 
when those divisions broke out in the church of Corinth^ 
to which St. Paul refers in his first Epistle to the Corin- 



* Qiiid enbn fucit, excepta ordination^, Episcopus, quod presbyter nori. 
facial ? 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 223 

thians. For it was immediately after these divisions took 
-place, and in the very time of the apostles, that provision 
was made for what Jerome calls the " remedy of schism," 
and to which he alludes more particularly in his commentary 
on the Epistle to Titus, in which w« find this account given 
of the same matter, that when it began to be said, I am of 
Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and " every one 
thought that those whom he baptized belonged to himself, 
and not to Christ, it was decreed through the whole world, 
that one, chosen from among the presbyters, should be set 
over the rest, to whom should belong the whole care of the 
church, that so the seeds of schism might be taken away."* 
Allowing now, that such a decree did really take place, on 
the occasion which is here said to have given rise to it, we 
must still find it necessary to inquire, by whom it was 
made, and what authority there was for making it. It 
could not be the consequence of any voluntary agreement 
-among the presbyters themselves, who were the persons 
whose pov^rer, it seems, had been abused, and was, there- 
fore, to be now restrained : For such an agreement could 
onlv have produced a disposition to submit to this restraint, 
but could not imply that they had any competent authority 
to impose it. No general council had yet been called, no 
assembly of the church held, which could pretend to give 
laws to all its members, or to issue any other decrees than 
what had come from those who had received power from 
on high — to " go and teach all nations." It was to the 
apostles^ therefore, and to them only, that we can ascribe 
the decree to which Jerome refers, if any such was made 
for binding the whole Christian world; so that even on the 
principle which he lays down. Episcopacy can be traced to 
no other source than apostolic institution. 

* " Postquam vero unusquisque, eos quosbaptizaverat suosputavitesse, 
non Christi, in toto orbe decrctuin est, ut unus de presbyteris electis super- 
ponefetur ceeteris, ad quem omnis ecclesisc cura pertineret, et schisma- 
tum semina toUerentur." 



224 General DefeiKe of Episcopacy, 

If after what has now been said of Jerome's testimony, 
it should still be pretended, that his Alexandrian custom, 
militates against any such original distinction been bishop 
and presbyter, as we have all along asserted, we shall find 
a sufficient reply to this objection in Jerome's own words, 
used against one of his antagonists on a similar occasion, 
*' Quid mihi profers unius urbis consuetudinem ?" Why 
do you twit me with the custom of one city t Or, as he 
expresses the same sentiment in another place by an antithe- 
sis, which suffers from being translated into English— 
" Major est (auctoritas) or bis quam urbis,'*'' The example 
of a world is of more authority than that of a city. But 
indeed there are many arguments which might be adduced 
to show, that even the practice of the church in the city qf 
Alexandria was not such as Jerome appears, or rather as 
his commentators would make him appear to represent it. 
There were two writers considerably earlier than he, and 
both of them members of this same presbytery of Alex- 
andria, which is pretended to have had such extraordi- 
nary powers in the nomination or appointment of their 
bishop ; and yet no notice is taken by them, not the least 
hint given either by Clemens or Origen, of any such pecu- 
liar practice or privilege in the church to which they be- 
longed. This is the more remarkable in the case of Ori- 
gen, who frequently complained of the severity with which 
he had been treated by his bishop Demetrius, but never 
thought of reminding him of the equality of footing on 
which they stood, or of claiming the rights of a fellow 
presbyter ; which surely he might have done, had Deme- 
trius been no more than a temporary moderator, placed in 
the chair with no other ceremony than that of salutation, 
and for no other purpose, than collecting the votes of his 
brethren, and preserving order in their several meetings. 

We are not disposed to call in question the testimony of 
Jerome, whose character and abilities we hold in just vene- 
ration J and had he personally witnessed, or been contem- 



General Defence of Episcopacy. 225 

porary with those who witnessed, the singular custom 
which he assigns to the church in Alexandria, we should 
have paid all due respect to " his testimony, as a testimony 
in relation to a matter of fact, both recent and notorious :" 
But we are surprised that a writer, so much applauded for 
accuracy as Dn Campbell, should have distinguished Je- 
rome's testimony in this manner , or held it out as " regard- 
ing the then late uniform practice of the church of Alex- 
andria ;" as it appears, even by his own calculation, that 
from the time when the practice ceased, to the time when 
Jerome gave this account of it, there must have elapsed 
near an hundred and forty years ; a much longer period 
than seem.s to be intimated by the manner in which our 
Professor speaks of it : and it may well be ouestioned 
whether a transaction at such a distance of time, however 
notorious, could properly be termed recent^ or whether, in 
referring to the happy event of 1660, an accurate writer 
would, in 1800, call it the late restoration. 

But we are told, that in support of Jerome's testimony, 
" that of the Alexandrian patriarch Eutychius has been 
pleaded, who, in his annals of that church, takes notice of 
the same practice, but with greater particularity of circum- 
stances than had been done by Jerome." And our Lec- 
turer might also have told his pupils, that this same annalist 
lived as far down as the tenth century, and though a 
patriarch, such as the church produced at that day, was 
remarkable for nothing so much as his credulity, and the 
inconsistency of his narratives, not only with those of more 
authentic historians, but often with themselves. Neither 
Jerome nor he produces any authorities for what they 
report of the practice at Alexandria ; and as to the former, 
it is well known, that being a man of warm temper, hot in 
disputation, and possessed of extensive learning, and won- 
derful powers of mind, he would readily take hold of any 
appearance of argument, and push it in every direction, by 
his peculiar strength of language, to carry the point which 

29 



:^6 General DefeiKe of Episcopacy* 

he had in view, and was eager to accomplish. That this 
was the case when he wrote his epistle to Evagrius, is in 
some measure acknowledg-ed by our Professor himself, who 
says — ^that what Jerome had been maintaining in the pre- 
ceding part of this letter, was " in opposition to some dea- 
con, who had foolishly boasted of the order of deacons, as 
being superior to the order of presbyters." Feeling, there- 
fore, for the dignity of his own office, thus in danger of 
being trampled on by such presumptuous folly, Jerome's 
object was, by every possible means, to exalt the presbifter^ 
in order to repress the aspiring pretensions of the deacon^ 
With this view, a man of such keen resentment, and 
warmth of disposition, would naturally push his argument 
beyond its proper bearing, and in his haste to keep down 
the presumption of an inferior order, would easily run on, 
till he encroached on that which was superior to his own i 
that so by adding to the height on which he stood, he might 
increase his distance from those that were below him* 
Those who coolly attend to his train of reasoning on the 
subject before us, can hardly fail to discover that this is 
often the case ; and, on many occasions, will find it more 
difficult to reconcile Jerome to himself, than to draw any 
advantage from him, in favour of that cause, which the 
followers of his apologist, Blondel, have so anxiously 
brought him forward to support. 

It has been justly observed, that " in spite of the appa- 
rent contradictions to be found in the writings of Jerome, 
some of the strongest proofs may be produced from them, 
that the original establishment of the Christian church was 
Epiacopal^^ in the true and proper sense of that term.^ 
In this same epistle to Evagrius, he says expressly-— 
" That we may know that the apostolic traditions were 
taken from the Old Testament, that which Aaron and his 
sons, and the Levites were in the temple, let the bishops, 

* See an Appendix to Mr. Daubeny's Guide to the Churchy vol. i. p. 66, 



Beneral Defence of Episcopacy* 22^ 

*^esbyters and deacons claim to themselves in the church."^ 
Here it is plainly asserted, not only that the hierarchy of 
<the church is founded on apostolic tradition, but also that 
the apostles had the model of the temple in their view, and 
raised their plan of church government according to the 
Jewish econom}^, by placing the same difference between 
bishop, presbyter and deacon, under the gospel, as there 
had been between the high-priest, priest and Levite under 
the law ; a position, which overturns every argument that 
can be brought from any other part of his writings, to 
prove the identity of bishop and presbyter, or that the 
latter is of the same order with the former ; of whom he 
says also in this epistle — " that the power of riches, or the 
humility of poverty, does not make a bishop higher or 
lower ; but they are all successors of the apostles."*!* On 
the same principle he argues against the Luciferians in the 
following manner — ^" that the safety of the church depends 
on the dignity of the chief priest, (or bishop) to whom, if 
a peculiar power be not given, superior to that of others, 
there will be as many schisms as priests in the churches."}: 
To the same purpose we find him admonishing Nepotian 
** to be subject to his chief priest, and to receive him a& 
the father of his soul; for what Aaron and his sons were, 
that we know the bishop and presbyters to be."|| It may 
also be observed, that in his Catalogue of ecclesiastical wri* 

* ** Et ut sciam'js traditioiies apostoHcas sumptas de veteri testamento:; 
<|Uod Aaron, et filii ejus, et Levitjc, in templo fuerint, hoc sibi Episcopi, 
presbyter! atque diaconi vendicent in ecclesia." Epist. ad Evag. 

f " Potentia divitiarum, et paupertatis humilitas, val subliraiorem vd 
inferiorem Episcopum non facit. Ceterum omnes apostolorum succes- 
soies sunt." Epis. ad Evag. 

\ " Ecclesiae saius in sumrai sacei'dotis dignitate pendet, cui si non 
cxors quiedam, et ab omnibt|;> eminens detur potestas, tot in ecclesii^ 
efficientur schismata quot sacerdotes." Dialog, advers. Luciferian. 

II " Esto subjectus pontifici tuo, et quasi animK parentem suscipe: 
Quod Aaron et filios ejus, hos Episcopum et presbyteros esse noveri- 
mus." Epist. ad Nepot. 



^28 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

iersy he mentions " St. James the Just, called the brdthef 
of our Lord, as ordained by the apostles bishop of Jerusa- 
lem, Timothy as ordained bishop of Ephesus by St. Paul, 
and Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, by St. John :" And in the 
same work he cites the genuine epistles of Ignatius, as the 
third bishop of Antioch after the apostle Peter, in which 
epistles we know how clearly the distinction between bishop 
and presbyter is marked, and the authority of the superior 
order as firmly maintained. To all this may be added what 
he says, in his, epistle against the Montanists, that whereas 
" among them the bishop was considered as but in the 
third degree, among us the bishops hold the place of the 
apostles."^ 

We have now taken a concise, but we believe correct 
enough view, both of the " testimony and opinion" of Je- 
rome, in regard to the point in question between the advo- 
cates for and against Episcopacy. We have seen him ad- 
mitting, in his own way, that the church of Alexandria 
had this form of ecclesiastical polity in it, from the days of 
St. Mark the Evangelist, and that it was adopted as a 
remedy for those schisms and confusions, which broke out 
in the days of the apostles, and was no longer delayed than 
the disease appeared. We have seen him also acknowledg- 
ing, that the hierarchy of the Christian church was founded 
on apostolic tradition, and that in establishing the evangeli- 
cal polity, the apostles had an eye to the legal economy, and 
considered the peace and unity of the church as depending 
on the authority of the bishops, whom he therefore repre- 
sents as standing in the place of the apostles, and succeed- 
ing to all their ordinary powers. If these are the senti- 
ments, which Jerome delivers in plain unequivocal lan- 
guage, when allowed to speak for himself, and without suf- 
fering any " violence to his expressions," the friends of 
Episcopacy need not be afraid of meeting with any opposi- 

* " Apud eosEpiscopus tertius est, apud nos apostolorum locum Epis- 
copi tenent." Ep. 54. 



\ 



General Defmce of Episcopacy. 229 

tion either from his "opinion or his testimony ;" since both 
are equally favourable to their cause, when not wrested to 
a sense, which would make him as inconsistent with him- 
self as hostile to them. 

If after all it should be thought, that Jerome's language, 
in some parts of his works, is of a doubtful nature, and 
seems to give an account of the origin of Episcopal 
government, somewhat different from that which has the 
concurring testimony of antiquity in its favour, we may 
still be allowed to ask, whether such writers as Clemens of 
Rome, Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Polycarp, Clemens of 
Alexandria, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, and 
many more, long prior to Jerome, were not as capable, 
and had not as good opportunities, as he, with all his know- 
ledge of antiquity, could pretend to, of " investigating the 
origin of any ecclesiastical order or custom," and, therefore, 
of discovering what change, or whether any change had 
happened in the constitution of the church, from its first 
Foundation to their own times ? If such a question must 
be answered in the affirmative, we are equally certain, that 
they will all be found to agree in this, as a well known truth, 
that the ecclesiastical constitution, under which they lived, 
consisting of three distinct orders of church officers, with 
*' discriminating powers, had been framed by the apostles, 
after the pattern set them by their blessed Master, and from 
them handed down, without change or interruption, by a 
regular and duly authorized succession. 

We have observed, from the works of some of these early 
writers, how they were accustomed to argue against the he- 
retics of those times, from the impossibility of their showing 
that regular succession of bishops from the apostles, which 
distinguished all the sound and orthodox parts of the Chris- 
tian church. But how weak and silly had this argument 
been, if the heretics could at any time have proved a breach 
in that succession ; much more could they have shown, by 
undoubted evidence, that it had no relation to the apostles, 



/ 



230 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

and did not at all commence till about thirty or forty yeaM 
after the last of them was removed from this world ? Had 
this been a fact, known, or even but surmised at that time, 
we may well suppose, how eagerly it would have been laid 
hold of, by the enemies of the true faith, to cut down at 
once the whole force of that reasoning, which, founded 
on the apostolic succession of bishops, had been so repeat^ 
edly and powerfully employed against them. 

The strength of this argument did not depend on any in* 
genious subtilty in the manner of stating it. — There was 
nothing connected with it, which could be considered as 
matter of abstruse speculation, that might be differently un^ 
derstood by the opposite parties. The whole point in ques- 
tion was to be decided by an appeal to those ecclesiastical 
records, from which the succession of bishops in the several 
churches might be easily ascertained ; and no mistake was 
likelv to happen, none indeed could generally prevail, when 
the public registers were so numerous, and so many monu- 
ments remained to bear witness to every important transac- 
tion, from the days of the apostles down to that very period^ 
which some authors in thiese latter times have thought 
proper to fix, as the sera of a wonderful change in the con-^ 
stitution and government of the Christian church.— They 
have not indeed agreed as to the precise time when thi§ 
supposed alteration took place ; but in general their opi- 
nions seem to coincide pretty much with that of Dr. Camp- 
bell, who acknowledges, that " before the middle of the 
second century, a subordination in the ecclesiastic polity, 
which he calls primitive Episcopacy, began to obtain very 
generally throughout the Christian world, every single 
church or congregation having a plurality of presbyters, who, 
as well as the deacons, were all under the super mtendency of 
one pastor or bishop."^ Now, here is an acknowledgment 



* " It was under these circumstances," says Mr. Gibbon, the historian, 
•• that the lofty title of bishop began to raise itself above the humble 



J 



General Defence of Eplscopaey, 23 1 

that this extraordinary change in the ecclesiastic polity, 
which consisted in the subordination of many, and the su- 
perintendencif of one, had its beginning before the middle 
of the second century, that is, about forty or fifty years af- 
ter the death of St. John. At this period, being the close 
of the apostolic age, it is supposed that the ecclesiastic 
polity was a state of perfect parity, every church or congre- 
gation being under the direction of a college of bishops or 
presbyters, the same name being applied to all, with some 
iittle distinction in the senior colleague, which though not 
easily defined, and, by our Professor's account, " very dif- 
ferent from that which in process of time obtained," yet, 
he says, " served for a foundation to the edifice, that is, to 
the rise of Episcopal superiority." 

But even with the advantage of this foundation, we shall 
find it very difficult to account for the edifice which was so 
quickly reared, and at a time when so few materials could 
be furnished for that purpose, either by avarice or ambi- 
tion. Our Lecturer indeed thinks it " no reflection on the 
church in general, or even on the pastors in particular, to 
suppose, that however sincere their zeal for the cause of 

appellation of presbyter ; and while the latter remained the most natural 
distinction for the members of every Christian senate, the former was 
appropriated to the dignity of its new president. — The primitive bishops 
were considered only as the first of their equals, and the honourable ser- 
vants of a free people. Whenever the Episcopal chair became vacant by 
death, a new president was chosen among the presbyters by the suffrage 
of the whole congregation, every member of which supposed himself in- 
vested with a sacred and sacerdotal character. Such v\as the mild and 
equal constitution by which the Christians were governed more than an 
hundred years after the death of the apostles. Every society formed 
within itself a separate and independent republic." — See a great deal 
more to the same purpose, from p. 328 to p. 341 of the 2d. vol. 8vo, of 
the History of the Decline mid Fall of the Homan Empire; from which 
an attentive reader cannot fail to observe how closely our Christian Pro- 
fessor has imitated the sceptical historian. An injidel might have had 
reasons for slandering and abusing Episcopacy, of which a believer should 
'have been ashamed to avail himself. 



232 General Defence of Episcopacy"* 

Christ might be, as it undoubtedly was with a very great ma- 
jority, they would not be entirely superior to considerations 
either of interest or of ambition, when such considerations 
were not opposed by motives of a higher nature."* And 
we may ask, what higher' motives could have been set in 
opposition to these worldly considerations, than those which 
must have daily presented themselves to the minds of the 
primitive pastors in the age to which we are now looking 
back, when many of them must have been ordained by the 
apostles themselves, or by their immediate successors, and 
all of them may be supposed to have possessed a consider- 
able share of the apostolic spirit and disposition, and were at 
any rate exposed to the same hardships and sufferings, the 
same deprivation of all worldly comforts and conveniences, 
which the apostles had to encounter? Is it then to be ima- 
gined, that they would pretend to alter that form of mi- 
nistry which the apostles had established in the church, or 
depart so soon from the rule, which, by the direction of 
the Holy Spirit, had been given them to walk by ? Can it 
be credited, that men so humble, and heavenly minded, 
so meek and unassuming as these primitive pastors unde- 
niably were, could dare to bring forward a system of ec- 
clesiastic polity in direct opposition to that, which, by 
Christ's command, his apostles had delivered to the con- 
verted nations, and thus prefer a little temporary pre-emi- 
nence among their fellow servants on earth, to the eternal 
approbation of their great Lord and Master in heaven? 
Could such folly and presumption be expected from men 
who, in every other respect, had acted a wise, sober and con- 
sistent part, and rather than renounce their Redeemer, and a 
due regard to his institutions, had shown themselves ready 
and willing to endure, and many of them actually did en- 
dure, the most cruel and barbarous sufferings, which the 
malice of their heathen persecutors could possibly contrive 

* Lecture viii. 



^General Defence of Episcopacy, 233 

as instruments of a spiteful rage against the faith of Jesus, 
and the order and unity which then adorned his church ? — . 
Could, for instance, the zealous and venerable Ignatius, 
.who was such an ornament to that very period, in which 
the pretended innovation is supposed to have taken place ; 
--**.GOuld he have concurred in the base presumptuous 
scheme of new-modelling the frame and constitution of the 
church, when his whole desire was to contribute to its 
peace and preservation, and to bear all that his enemies 
could inflict, if so he might attain to be with its glorious 
Head, even Jesus Christ ? Or could his illustrious contem- 
porary, Polycarp, the great light of the Asiatic churches, 
have given his sanction to so bold and impious an undertak- 
ing ; the man who, when urged to repent of his error and 
blaspheme Christ, replied — " Fourscore and six years have 
I served him, and he never did me any harm : how, then, 
can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?" 

Perhaps it will be said, that in the days of these holy 
martyrs, the change or innovation alluded to, was only 
beginning to make its appearance, and by advancing slowly 
in its progress, would be less apt to excite apprehension in 
that numerous body of church officers, whose station and 
powers in the church were at last so materially affected by 
it. Our Professor's plan of parochial Episcopacy, as deli- 
neated by his fanciful description, would seem a deviation, 
so small and inconsiderable, from his apostolic presbytery, 
as to create no alarm in the minds of those who did not, 
mid perhaps could not, perceive how gradually it was ap- 
proaching to a still greater change, leading insensibly to 
what he calls the next step of the hierarchy, " when pre- 
lacy, or diocesan Episcopacy succeeded the parochial, and 
began generally to prevail." Here again we are presented 
with another beginning'^ and what our Lecturer thinks a 
new system of ecclesiastic polity, which, not satisfied with 
calling diocesan Episcopacy^ he chooses also to distinguish 
by the name o£ prelacy; a term which, in the vulgar lan- 

30 



234 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

giiage of this country, being often connected with popery^ 
has, with many, an invidious meaning attached to it. Yet 
we can see no good reason why this title should be consi-* 
dered as more descriptive of diocesan than of parochial 
Episcopacy, since the bishop had been surely as much a 
prelate (praelatus), or person preferred in his parish^ as he 
afterwards was in his diocese^ and Dr. Campbell acknow- 
ledges, not only that " it was a proper Episcopacy in re- 
spect of the disparity of the ministers," which is the very 
thing we contend for, but also " that it seems to have as* 
stimed the model of a proper Episcopate^ as the word is 
now understood^ before the middle of the second century." 
And if the case be really so, we shoiild be glad to learn 
what occasion there was for our Professor taking so much 
pains to establish an imaginary distinction between his pa-* 
rochial and diocesan Episcopacy ; which may truly be called 
a " distinction without a difference," as is evidently shown 
by his own quotations from BurrHs Ecclesiastical LaWy 
where that writer justly observes — -" The cathedral church 
is the parish church of the whole diocese ; which diocese 
was therefore commonly called parochia m ancient times^ 
till the application of this name to the lesser branches into 
which it was divided, made it, for distinction's sake, to be 
called only by the name of diocese." Bingham also, a very 
industrious inquirer into the antiquities of the Christian 
church, whose authority we have already quoted on this 
subject,^ informs us, " that the ancient name of an Episco- 
pal diocese for three hundred years was commonly '7ro(,^oix.icc, 
which some mistake for a parish church, or single congre- 
gation ; whereas, as learned men have rightly observed, it 
signified then, not the places or habitations near a church, 
but the towns or villages near a city, which, together with 
the city, was the bishop's Tra^oiKia, or, as we now call it, his 
diocese, the bounds of his ordinary care and jurisdiction. 

* See page 186. 



General Defence of Episcopacy » 235 

That thus it was, appears evidently from this, that the 
largest dioceses, such as those of Rome, Antioch, and 
Alexandria, which had many particular churches in them, 
were called by the same name ; as the reader may find an 
hundred passages in Eusebius, where he uses the word 
ffa^oiJtia, when he speaks of these large and populous cities, 
which had many particular churches in them."— He then 
adds the testimony of other writers to the same purpose j 
and infers from the whole, " that nothing can be plainer, 
than the use of the word Tra^oixta for a diocese, to the fourth 
century ; and now about this time the word diocese began 
to be used likewise."^ 

Such being the language and practice of the primitive 
times with regard to this matter, it was very difficult for 
our Professor to fix a precise date for the beginning of his 
prelacy^ or diocesan Episcopacy^ as distinguished from that 
which was parochial^ and yet was a proper Episcopate, 
even " as the word is now understood." All that we find 
him attempting with this view, is in a passage of his eighth 
Lecture, where, speaking of " the first subdivision of the 
pastoral charge into smaller precincts, since called parishes, 
the name which had formerly belonged to the whole," he 
says, " there can be no doubt, that there had been instances 
of it in great cities, long before the expiration of the third 
century, in some, perhaps in Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, 
even before the expiration of the second, though it was far 
from being general till a considerable time after the third.""!* 
But as we agree with the Professor in this, that " a pastor's 
charge is properly the people, not the place," we can see 
no difference in the nature of prelacy, or Episcopacy, whe- 
ther the place in wich the people reside, who are under the 
bishop's charge, be called a parish or a diocese ; or whether 
his charge be of larger or smaller extent. It is the pre- 

* See Bingbam's Antiquities, vol. iii. p. 345, 346, 
f Lecture viii. 



^ Jf> General Defence of Episcopacy. 

emmehce of office, or the superior authority annexed to the 
Episcopal character, that gives the true criterion of prelacy} 
and at whatever period that mark of distinction first ap- 
peared in the Christian church, if it did not originate from 
the apostles, and show itself in their immediate successors, 
it must have been considered as a very striking encroach- 
ment on the powers possessed by the parochial college of 
presbyters. They must thus have been reduced to a state 
of subordination and dependence, which it was strange that 
they did not perceive to be the effect of unwarranted usur-* 
pation on the part of the bishops, and, therefore, to be re- 
sisted by the presbyters with a degree of firmness and re^ 
solution worthy of the sacred and equal trust which had 
beeii committed to them. 

Our Lecturer was aware, how unaccountable this must 
appear to every person acquainted with the common feel- 
ings of human nature, and, therefore, has endeavoured to 
obviate the difRculty in the best manner he could. " Some,''^ 
he says, *' have represented it, as an insuperable objection 
to the presbyterian hypothesis, concerning the rise of Epis*- 
eopal superiority, that it seems to imply so great ambition 
in one part, and so great supineness (not to give it a worse 
name) in the rest of the primitive pastors ordained by the 
apostles, and by the apostolic men that came after them, 
as is perfectly incredible. This they seem to think a de- 
monstration a priori., that the thing is impossible."^ And 
we certainly do think it, if not impossible, yet at least 
highly improbable, and a thing which has never yet oc- 
curred in any similar case, either recorded in history, or 
handed down by tradition. Dr« Campbell, however, is 
very ingenious in pointing out the causes and motives, 
which, in his opinion, might lead to it ; '' and so far," says 
he, " am I from thinking that the ambition or the vices of 
the first ministers gave rise to their authority, that I am 

* Lecture vi. 



General Defence of Episcopacy * 237 

certain that this effect is much more justly ascribed to their 
virtues. An aspiring disposition rouses jealousy — ^jealousy 
puts people on their guard. There needs no more to check 
ambition, whilst it remains unarmed with either wealth or 
power. But there is nothing which men are not ready to 
yield to distinguished merit, especially when matters are 
in that state, wherein every kind of pre-eminence, instead 
of procuring wealth and secular advantages, exposes but to 
greater danger, and to greater suffering." 

Such is the train of reasoning, with a good deal more to 
the same purpose, made use of by our Professor, to over- 
throw the " demonstration," to which he had alluded, and 
to make it appear, that the rise of Episcopal superiority is 
to be accounted for, by ascribing it to distinguished merit, 
and distinguished danger, on the part of those who were 
promoted to that superior dignity. That the first of these 
causes could not operate in giving rise to the " Episcopal 
superiority," is evident from what has been already said 
on the nature of it. And if this superiority be considered 
as a bold deviation from the plan of ecclesiastic polity laid 
down by our Lord's apostles, and a presumptuous depar- 
ture from the parity which they had established, it could 
not possibly receive any countenance or support from men 
of " distinguished merit" in the service of the church. 
With such a character, they could never think of introduc- 
ing, much less of accepting, any superiority or pre-eminence 
above their equal brethren, whereby they might make them- 
selves lords over God's heritage, in the manner which he 
had forbidden. This was a species of merit as unknown 
to these primitive times, as it was unworthy of the Chris- 
tian pastors who lived in them. The" pious Irenaeus of 
Lyons, the zealous Cyprian of Carthage, with his contem- 
poraries, Fabian and Cornelius of Rome, and many more 
whom we could name of the " noble army of martyrs," 
were as much prelates^ or diocesan bishops^ as any that ever 
canie after them under that denomination, and some of 



jh 



238 General Defence of Episcopaeg* 

them lived at the times, when even Dr. Campbell admits 
the introduction of diocesan Episcopacy in a variety of in- 
stances. Is it then to be supposed, that all these holy and 
venerable prelates would encounter the severest trials, and 
yield themselves to a violent death, in the humble hope 
of receiving a crown of life, for assuming a superiority 
tt^hich did not belong to them, and transgressing the limits 
assigned to their ministerial order by that Lord, from whom, 
the whole power of it was derived, and the whole reward 
of a faithful discharge of duty to be expected ? If such a 
conduct was far from giving them any merit in the sight of 
God, it ought as little to have procured for them any hor 
nourable mark of distinction among men ; especially among 
their fellow pastors, who were thus held out as placed in 
an inferior station, on account of their inferior merit, or 
rather because they had no merit at all, not even that of 
resisting such a daring innovation, and striving to preserve 
the rights of their own order from being swallowed up by 
this usurped superiority of rank, which, though but newly 
introduced, was rapidly spreading, under the name of dio-. 
cesan Episcopacy, 

It is strange indeed, that through all the churches o^ 
Asia, Africa, and Europe, the " senior brother" in every 
college of pastors, should thus at once have trampled on 
the rights and privileges of his colleagues, as if a general 
conspiracy had been entered into for that purpose : and yet 
it is still more strange and unaccountable, that not one of 
these innumerable pastors should have made a single re- 
monstrance against so flagrant an usurpation, as if they too 
had all combined, at one and the same time, to betray their 
trust, and allow themselves to be thus shamefully degraded. 
It is as impossible to conceive that any such thing should 
have happened then, as to believe now, that all the mode-^ 
rators of the several synods under the Scotch establishment, 
would be allowed to assume at once not only the title, bui 
the superior rank and authority, of diocesan bishops, witli=* 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 23d 

©lit the smallest opposition from any one member of these 
synods, or the least notice taken of such a wonderful 
change of system.' — Nay, the difficulty must be much 
greater, if we wish to make the cases similar: For then we 
must suppose the whole of Christendom to be under the 
same form of church government as that which is esta- 
blished in this northern part of Britain ; to be convinced too 
that this form of government is of apostolic institution, 
and yet permit a few aspiring ecclesiastics to overturn it, 
and introduce in all the Christian churches a new, unknown 
scheme of " Episcopal superiority," favourable only to the 
views of those who were its first contrivers. 

It is further to be considered, that these few ambitious 
prelates, who were thus so astonishingly successful in get- 
ting themselves acknowledged to be true diocesan bishops, 
were widely scattered over the face of the earth, and for the 
most part knew very little of one another, and could hold 
no general meeting for the purpose of concerting their plan, 
or of obtaining the sanction of civil power to recommend it. 
And yet so it happened, that under all these disadvantages, 
they could contrive to learn each other's sentiments, to think 
and act alike in every stage of this refined system of policy, 
and at length were able to exhibit an entire new form of 
ecclesiastic government, under the name of diocesan Epis- 
copacy ; nay, had the amazing address to persuade the 
whole Christian world, that so far from any change having 
taken place, the church of Christ had all along, from the 
days of the aposdes, been Episcopal. Nothing can add to 
the degree of surprise, which must be excited by all this 
inexplicable procedure, unless it be the consideration of 
what Dr. Campbell mentions as another cause of the rise 
of Episcopal pre-eminence, that " instead of procuring 
wealth and secular advantages, it only exposed to greater 
danger, and to greater suffering." This, we believe, was 
really the case, in the severe and trying times to which we 
are now looking back. As soQn as an edict passed for per- 



240 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

seciitihg the Christians in any part of the church, the bi- 
shops were immediately aimed at, as the most guilty per- 
sons, and the first that were exposed to the fury of their 
persecutors. As their danger was thus imminent, their 
labour too was often no less severe ; for upon them was 
laid the principal care of the flock, which frequently re- 
quired the greatest vigilance and attention in the shepherd. 
To the undergoing all this toil and trouble, they were 
inipelled by a sense of duty ; and were supported under it, 
by the hope of having their services accepted by their bles- 
sed Master. But could they have felt the force of this 
motive, or indulged this hope, had they been conscious 
at the same time, that they were violating his commands, 
and arrogating to themselves a power and pre-eminence, 
which he had expressly forbidden ? And of this they must 
have been conscious, had their Episcopal superiority been 
an infringement of the apostolic institution, and an entire 
subversion of that system of ecclesiastic parity, which, 
by their Lord's command, the teachers of the nations had 
formed and left with his church, that it might be there re- 
tained to the end of the world. 

In accounting for so early and so universal a departure 
from this supposed system of equality among the first Chris- 
tian pastors, our Lecturer alludes to the origin of civil 
g-ovemment, and thinks it " easy to evince, that the parallel 
case of monarchy will, in the nature of things, be found 
equally impossible."^ The friends of that form of govern- 
ment will, no doubt, think it equally easy to remove this 
impossibility, by bringing what they take to be clear, un- 
questionable evidence, that monarchy, as well as Episco- 
pacy, is founded on divine appointment. But supposing 
the case to be otherwise, and that monarchy, or, as our 
Professor calls it, " the dominion of one man over innu- 
merable multitudes of men," was really a breach of their 

* Lecture vi. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 241 

original equality, and an encroachment on those " natural 
rights of man," the maintaining of which has often made 
a noise in the world, and, of late years, has been attended 
with the most shocking barbarities ; is it then possible to 
believe, that such revolutions work their way in a calm 
and quiet manner, and are allowed to pass without notice, 
as the effects of natural causes, " in the ordinary progres- 
sion of human things?"— Yet of a similar nature, though 
perhaps not so difficult to be accomplished, was the change, 
which is supposed to have taken place in the church, by the 
introduction of prelacy, or the setting up in every diocese^ 
one pastor above the rest, vested with all the powers, which 
have ever since been assigned to the Episcopal office- 
Such a change as this from that pastoral equality, which, 
it is said, had previously subsisted from the days of the 
apostles, we should think, must have excited some alarm, 
or produced some disturbance in the church, or at least 
have been taken some notice of, by the many writers, who 
record the transactions of that very period in which this 
remarkable change is pretended to have happened. 

Let us but consider the high regard always expressed 
among the primitive Christians for every thing which they 
believed to be of apostolic institution ; what a controversy, 
for instance, was raised on that account, and carried on for 
many years, with the greatest zeal on both sides, about the 
proper time of observing Easter, the annual festival which 
they all celebrated in memory of our Lord's resurrection. 
And when such a question as this was deemed to be of so 
much importance, although it regarded merely the day that 
was supposed to be fixed on by the aposdes, can it be ima- 
gined that the constitution and form of government which 
they had established in the church, would not be held in 
the highest veneration, or that every care would not be 
taken to preserve it pure and entire in the very state in 
which the apostles had left it? When any schism or heresy 
broke out in those days, we find the abettors of it assigning 

31 



i^42 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

various causes, and often at a loss what to assign for their 
breaking away from the communion of the church, and, 
as it was then called, " setting up altar against altar." But 
had they known, or suspected, that any change or inno- 
vation had been introduced into the government of the 
church, such as our modern opposers of prelacy, or Epis- 
copacy, represent it to be, they would have eagerly brought 
it forward, as a sufficient reason for their abandoning a so- 
ciety which had submitted to such irregular and usurped 
authority. The authors of this ambitious project would 
have been held up to popular indignatioUj as " lording it 
over God's heritage," and it would not have been left to 
the declaimers " in our more enlightened times," to ex- 
hibit in its proper colours " the priestly pride of such pre- 
iatical preachers." Yet nothing of this kind was ever 
heard of, in the times to which we are now referring. No 
ecclesiastical historian of that or the succeeding ages takes 
the least notice of any such departure from apostolic insti- 
tution : No adversary of the church in those days ever ob- 
jected to it : And from all this silence both in friends and 
enemies ; from nothing being said either to justify or con- 
demn the change that is supposed to have happened, we 
may certainly conclude that no such change had taken 
place ; but that the government of the church had still con- 
tinued, without any interruption, what the apostles had 
left it, a proper and regular Episcopacy, whether we caU 
it parochial or diocesan, which makes no difference as to 
the nature of the institution, or the authority on which 1% 
was founded. 

We may, therefore, sura up what has been said on this 
point, in the words of a most learned and distinguished 
divine, whose works have been long admired for their 
genuine piety, and who, in asserting Episcopacy to be of 
divine institution, appeals thus to the faith and practice of 
Christendom — " Be ye followers of me, as I am of Christ, 
is an apostolical precept. We have seen how the apostles 



General Defence of Episcopacy » 243 

have followed Christ, how their tradition is consequent of 
divine institution. Next let us see how the church has 
followed the apostles, as the apostles have followed Christ. 
Catholic practice is the next basis of the power and order 
of Episcopacy. For — ^let us consider-— Is it imaginable 
that all the world should, immediately after the death of 
the apostles, conspire together, to seek themselves, and 
not the things that are of Jesus Christ, to erect a go- 
vernment of their own devising, not ordained by Christ, 
not delivered by his apostles, and to relinquish a divine 
foundation, and the apostolical superstructure, which, if it 
was at all, was a part of our Master's will, which whoso- 
ever knew and observed not, was to be beaten with many 
stripes ? Is it imaginable, that those gallant men, who 
could not be brought off from the prescriptions of gen- 
tilism, to the seeming impossibilities of Christianity, withr 
out evidence of miracle, and clearness of demonstration 
upon agreed principles, should all, upon their first adhesion 
to Christianity, make an universal dereliction of so consi- 
derable a part of their Master's will, and leave gentilism 
to destroy Christianity; for he that erects another economy 
than what the Master of the family hath ordained, destroys 
all those relations of mutual dependence which Christ hath 
made for the conjunction of all the parts of it, and so de- 
stroys it in the formality of a Christian congregation or 
family ? — Is it then imaginable, that all those glorious mar- 
tyrs, that were so strict observers of divine sanctions and 
canons apostolical, would be also so assiduous in conttmn- 
ing the government that Christ left for his family, and 
erect another ? To what purpose were all their watchings, 
their banishments, their fears, their fastings, and formida- 
ble austerities, and, finally, their so frequent martyrdoms ? 
Of what excellency or avail, if, after all, they should be 
hurried out of the world, and all their fortunes and posses- 
sions, by unilmely, by disgraceful, by dolorous deatlis, to 
be set bef <^ie a tribunal, to give account of their universal 



244 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

neglect, and contemning of Christ's last testament, in so 
great an affair as the whole government of his church ? If 
all Christendom should be guilty of so open, so united a 
defiance against their Master, by what argument or confi- 
dence can any misbeliever be persuaded to Christianity, 
which, in all its members, for so many ages together, is so 
unlike its first institution as in its most public affair, and 
for matter of order of the most general concernment, is so 
contrary to the first birth? Where are the promises of 
Christ's perpetual assistance, of the impregnable perma- 
nence of the church against the gates of hell, of the spirit 
of truth to lead it into all truth, if she be guilty of so 
grand an error as to erect a throne, where Christ hath 
made all level, or appointed others to sit in it, than whom 
he suffers ? Either Christ hath left no government, or most 
certainly the church hath retained that government, what- 
soever it is."* And he concludes the whole of his reason- 
ing on this subject with the application of that golden rule 
of Vincentius Lirinensis— " We must take care above all 
things to adhere to that which has been believed, in all 
places, at all times, and by all persons ; for this is truly 
and properly catholic :" And nothing was ever more so 
than the government of the church by bishops. Therefore, 
as the same ancient author observes — " It never was, is, 
nor ever shall be lawful to teach Christian people any other 
thing, than that which has been received"t from a primi- 
tive fountain, and has descended in the stream of catholic, 
uninterrupted succession. 

* See section xxii. of an excellent tract, entitled — ** Of the sacred Or- 
der and Offices of Episcopacy " &c. bound up with the other polemical 
works of Dr Jeremy Taylor, chaplain to Charles the First, and bishop 
of Down and Connor. 

f " Magnopere curandum est, ut id teneamus quod ubique, quod sem- 
per, quod ab omnibus creditum est. Hoc est enim vere proprieque ca- 
tholicum. — Annunciare ergo Christianis catholicis, praeter id quod acce- 
perunt, nunquam licuit, nunquam licet, nunqua,ni licebit." Vincent. Li- 
Tin. adv. Haeres. cap. 3 — 14. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 245 

In opposition, however, to all these testimonies of an* 
dent times, which have been brought forward in support 
of the apostolic or Episcopal succession, there is an argu- 
ment still used by some writers, to lessen the force of so 
much accumulated evidence, by impressing on the mind 
as much doubt and uncertainty as possible, with regard to 
the manner in which this succession has been preserved, 
or carried on, from one age of the church to another. The 
danger of its failing, and the difficulty of knowing whether 
it has not so failed, or suffered interruption, were, there- 
fore, topics, of which our learned Professor would not fail 
to lay hold, when striving to maintain his opinion, that 
*' the validity of God's covenant," as he expresses himself, 
'' cannot depend on the ministry, or his promises be ren- 
dered ineffectual to the humble believer on account of any 
defect in the priesthood." To this he had been alluding 
in the beginning of his fourth Lecture, and after pointing 
out the difficulty of " examining the import of names and 
titles, and the authenticity of endless genealogies," he re- 
curs to the subject, as an inference from the case of the 
thankful Samaritan, whose faith was accepted, although he 
did not go and show himself to the priests: And yet — 
*' no order of men," says our Lecturer, " existing at pre- 
sent in the Christian church, can give any evidence of a 
divine right, compared with that of the tribe of Levi, and 
of the posterity of Aaron in the Jewish."* Now, if we 
should say, that the very reverse of this is the case, the 
position might be safely maintained on this ground, that it 
could not be so easily proved, that no spurious child had 
ever been introduced into the family of the high priest, as 
that no unordained person had ever been admitted to the 
Episcopal office. But, indeed, we have good reason to 
believe, that in either case, nothing of this kind has ever 
happened. It was sufficient for the Israelite to know, that 

* Lecture iv. 



246 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

the priesthood under the law having been established in the 
family of Aaron, no doubt had ever been entertained of 
that family being preserved pure from any illegitimate 
mixture. And the Christian has at least equal ground to 
be satisfied, that the government of the church under the 
gospel having been established by the apostles, in the way 
of Episcopal succession, that succession has never yet failed 
in the Christian world, however it may have been in some 
places despised, for two or three centuries past, and 
thrown aside as unnecessary. 

It is a circumstance, that must be well known to those 
who are acquainted with the history of the Christian 
church, that for the preservation of the Episcopal succes- 
sion, nothing more was requisite than a proper observance 
of the canons made by the church for that purpose, and a 
due regard to the doctrine, on which these canons were 
founded. It was always a received doctrine in every part 
of the church, that no ordination was valid, but that of 
bishops ; and the earliest canons required, that every 
bishop should be ordained or consecrated by two or three 
bishops. By this means, the Episcopal succession has been 
carefuUy preserved in every age, from the days of the 
apostles to the present time ; and since it was universally 
believed, that none but bishops could ordain, it was mo- 
rally impossible, that any person could be received as 
bishops, who had not been so ordained. This was the 
reason, which Mr. Law assigned for the security of the 
Episcopal succession, in one of his admirable letters to 
Bishop Hoadly^ and then applied it in this manner — " Now, 
is it not morally impossible, that in our church any one 
should be made a bishop without Episcopal ordination? 
Is there any possibility of forging orders, or stealing a 
bishopric by any other stratagem ? No ; it is morally im- 
possible, because it is an acknowledged doctrine amongst 
us, that a bishop can only be ordained by bishops. Now, 
as this doctrine must necessarily prevent any one being a 



General Defence of Episcopacy. 247 

bishop without Episcopal ordination in our age, so it must 
have the same effect in every other age, as well as ours ; 
and, consequently, it is as reasonable to believe, that the 
succession of bishops was not brqke in any age since the 
apostles, as that it was not broke in our own kingdom 
within these forty years. For the same doctrine, which 
preserves it forty years, may as well preserve it forty hun- 
dred years, if it was equally believed in all that space of 
time. And that this has been the constant doctrine of the 
church, we have the most undoubted evidence. We be- 
lieve the scriptures are not corrupted, because it was 
always a received doctrine in the church, that they were 
the standing rule of faith, and because the providence of 
God may well be supposed to preserve such books, as were 
to convey to every age the means of salvation. The same 
reasons prove the great improbability that this succession 
should ever be broke, both because it was always against a 
received doctrine to break it, and because we may justly 
hope the providence of God would keep up his own insti- 
tution."^ 

Such is the clear, satisfactory train of reasoning, by 
which a decisive answer is at once afforded to all the " dark 
and critical questions," that can possibly arise, even in such 
a fertile mind, as that of our late learned Lecturer, " about 
the import of names and titles, and the authenticity of end- 
less genealogies," the examination of which did not appear 
in such a formidable view, in the dawn of the reformation, 
and when, after a lapse of near a thousand years, men be- 
gan again to look into these questions, and to inquire into 



* See the second of the Three Letters written by the Rev. William 
Law to Bishop Iloadly, and lately reprinted in a collection of tracts, 
called " The Scholar armed against the Errors of the Time" ilfc. In 
the preface to which, this reason is assigned for republishing Mr. Law's 
Letters, that — " though incomparable for truth of argument, brightness 
of wit, and purity of English, and honoured with the highest admira- 
tion at their first appearance, they are now in a manner forgotten." 



248 General Defence of Episcopacy, 

the foundation of that ecclesiastical authority, which they 
still saw to be necessary for the preservation of the faith, 
the unity and order of the church. Even those who are 
considered as the founders of the presbyterian form of 
church government, did not object to Episcopacy, on ac- 
count of any doubt or uncertainty as to the regular succes- 
sion of bishops. So far from entertaining any suspicion or 
prejudice of that kind, they reckoned it a most unjust 
aspersion to say, that they condemned or threw off Epis- 
copacy, because they were obliged to do without it in 
Geneva, where they thought it impossible to have bishops, 
without submitting to that papal supremacy, which they 
had lately renounced. But as this was not the case in 
England, they highly applauded the Episcopal hierarchy 
of the English church, and congratulated the nation on 
their happiness in retaining it. This appears from their 
several letters to Queen Elizabeth, to the Archbishop of 
Canterbury, and others of the English bishops, in which 
they earnestly prayed to God for the continuance of so 
great a blessing, bemoaned their own unhappy circumstances 
in being deprived of it, because they had no magistrate to 
protect them, and owned that the want of Episcopacy was 
a great defect, but called it their misfortune rather than their 
fault. — " As for their excuse," we shall only say, in the 
words of a masterly writer on this subject, " we do not 
now meddle with it, for, we think, it was not a good one ; 
they might have had bishops from other places, though 
there were none among themselves but those who were 
popish, and they might as well have had bishops as pres- 
byters, without the countenance of the civil magistrate. 
It might have raised a great persecution against them, but 
that is nothing as to the truth of the thing ; and if they 
thought it a truth, they ought to have suffered for it."* 

* See a " Discourse on the ^talifications requisite to administer the Sa- 
crnments,^' by the celebrated Charles Leslie, and republished, with many 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 249 

But whatever weight may be allowed to their plea of 
necessity, it is evident, from their having recourse to it as 
an excuse for their conduct, that they considered the refor- 
mation, in which they were engaged, as a renouncing and 
withdrawing from, not pure and genuine Episcopacy, but 
the corruptions, which papal usurpation had grafted upon 
it. This i|5 plainly and openly avowed by their great leader 
Calvin, who, in opposing the claims of the Romish church, 
gays—" If they would give us an hierarchy, in which the 
bishops did so rise above others, as that they would not 
refuse to be subject to Christ, and to depend on him as 
their only Head, and be referred to him ; \n which they 
would so preserve brotherly communion among themselves, 
as to be united by nothing so much as his truth, then, in- 
deed, I should confess, that there is no anathema, of which 
liiose persons are not worthy, if any such there be, who 
would not reverence such an hierarchy, and submit to it 
isrith the utmost obedience."* And such an hierarchy he 
acknowledges that the church of England possessed, to 
which he therefore professes to give both inward rever- 
ence, and outward respect, assuring the bishops, that he 
would gladly have served them, in settling the affairs of 
their church. 



of his other tracts, in the Scholar Armed, &c. And in confirmation of 
the truth of Mr. Leslie's remark, " that the Genevan reformers might 
have had bishops from other places," see an Ecclesiastical History of 
Scotland, &c. by the Rev. John Skinner, vol. ii. p. 130, &c. where an 
account is given of no fewer thaw ten bishops, who, in the beginning of 
the reformation, renounced the errors of popery, and could have been 
the means of preserving the Episcopal order in any society that chose to 
accept of it. ^ 

* " Talem si nobis hierarchiam exhibeant, in qua sic emineant Epis- 
copi, ut Christo subesse non recusent, et ab illo tanquam unico capite 
pendeant, et ad ipsum referantur; in qua sic inter se fraternam societa- 
tem colant, ut non alio rnodo quam ejus veritate sint colligati, turn vero 
nullo non anathemate dignos fatear, si qui erunt, qui non earn reverean- 
tur, snmmaque obcdientia observent."— JDe Ncccss. Eccles. Reform. 

32 



255 General Defence of Episcopdcij 

To the same purpose we find Bcza expressing his senti- 
tnents, in language as strong as it was possible to use oti 
such an occasion — •" If, however, there be any," says he^ 
*' which you can hardly make me believe, who reject the 
whole order of bishops, God forbid that any man of a 
sound mind should assent to the madness of such persons."^ 
'And speaking of the government of the church of Eng- 
land by bishops, he says — •" Let her enjoy that singular 
blessing of God, which I wish may be ever continued to 
her."'!' Many more testimonies of a similar nature might 
be produced, to show how little countenance was given by 
these leading reformers abroad to their pretended fol- 
lov/ers in this countr}^, who would be satisfied with nothing 
less than the entire abolition of Episcbjjacy, as " being a 
great and insupportable grievance, and contrary to the in- 
clinations of the generality of the people."J It were easy 
to show how widely they differed in this respect from those 
whom they considered as promoting the same cause in 
Other countries. One remarkable instance of such differ- 
ence of sentiment appears from what is recorded of the 
learned Blondel, who is said to have concluded his "apo- 
logy for the opinion of Jerome," with words to this pur- 
pose — " By all that we have said to assert the rights of th^ 
presbytery, we do not intend to invalidate the ancient and 
apostolical constitution of Episcopal pre-eminence. But 
we believe.^ that wheresoever it is established conformably 
to the ancient canons^ it must be carefully preserved; and 
wheresoever by some heat of contention, or otherwise, it 
has been put down or violated, it ought to be reverendy 
restored." We aire farthe]^ informed, that " as the book 

* " Si qui sunt autem, (quod sane mihi baud facile persuaseris) qtii 
omhem Episcoporum ordinem rejiciunt, absit, ut quisquam satis sanac 
mentis furoribus illorum assentiatur." 

t " Fruatur sane ista singulari Dei beneficentia, q.U3e utinam sit illi 
perpetua." Tract, de Minist. Eccl. Grad. cap. i. et xviii. 

\ See Claim of Right, after the Revolution in 1688. 



General Defence of Episcopacy* 251 

iiad been written at the earnest request of the assembly at 
Westminster, and especially of the Scots ; when their 
agents in Paris saw this conclusion of Mr. Blondel's ma^ 
nuscript, they expostulated with him very loudly, for mar- 
ring all the good he had done in his book, disappointing 
the expectation of the assembly, and showing himself an 
enemy, instead of a friend, to their holy covenant ; this 
they urged upon him with such vehemency, and unwearied 
importunity, that they prevailed with him to put out that 
conclusion."* His intention however of admitting it, suf- 
ficiently shows what his sentiments were on this subject, 
and how far he was from abetting or approving those vio- 
lent measures, which were then in agitation for overturning 
that ancient and apostolic constitution of the church, which 
he wished to see carefully preserved, wherever it had been 
regularly established. 

We shall only take notice of another testimony, given by 
a divine of the presbyterian establishment in Holland, who 
could not be suspected of any prejudice in favour of Epis- 
copacy. This is the celebrated Mr. Le Clerc, whose words, 
as quoted by the present bishop of Lincoln, are these—" I 
have always professed to believe, that Episcopacy is of 
apostolical institution, and consequently very good, and 
very lawful ; that man had no manner of right to change it 
in any place, unless it was impossible otherwise to reform 
the abuses that crept into Christianity ; that it was jusdy 
preserved in England, where the reformation was practi- 
cable without altering it ; that, therefore, the protestants in 
England, and other places, where there are bishops, do very 
ill to separate from that discipline ; that they would still da 
much worse in attempting to destroy it, in order to set up 
presbytery, fanaticisni and anarchy. Things ought not to 

* This important piece of informatioti is given at full length in a let- 
ter from Dr. P. du Moulin to Dr. Durell, and published in the Appendix, 
to his Vievi of the Government and Public Worship of God in the reformed 
Churches beyond the Seas, p. 339, 340. 



2&2 General Defence of Episcopacy* 

be turned into a chaos, nor people seen every where with- 
out a call, and Without learning pretending to inspiration. 
Nothing is more proper to prevent them than the Episcopal 
discipline, as by law established in England, especially when 
those that preside in church government, are persons of 
penetration, sobriety and discretion."* — ^Yet this same Mr, 
Le Clerc exhibits a strong proof of the inconsistency of those 
writers on this subject who, if they do not halt between two 
opinions, seem desirous however to keep well with both 
sides ; for, arguing in another part of his works, against 
the necessity of Episcopal government, he tells us-—" It is 
nothing to the purpose to show, that Christ and his apostles 
instituted this form of church government, and that the 
church never had any other kind of government in it for 
above fifteen hundred years from our Saviour's days down- 
wards, which, though it be so clearly evidenced, that the 
truth of it cannot be denied, yet it is of no weight, nor de- 
serves to be regarded. For those, who would make the 
hierarchy necessary to the constitution of the Christian 
church, ought to prove, that God instituted Christianity 
for the sake of the Episcopal order, and that the Episcopal 
drder was not instituted for the sake of Christianity. — For 
if this order was appointed for the sake of the church 
(which they cannot deny) they must also acknowledge, 
that if it be more advantageous to the church in some 
places, to have this order abolished, it is not amiss to lay 
it aside in such places.^f 

Now, this is an argument for abolishing the Episcopal 
order, which, if carried to its full extent, will equally serve 
to prove the lawfulness ©r even expediency of laying aside 
every " outward and visible sign" in religion, nay, even the 
scriptures themselves ; since it may justly enough be said, 

* See Bishop Pretyman's Elements of Christian Theology, vol. ii. p. 
400, 401. 

t Bibliotheqiiey torn. ix. p. 159, as quoted by Dr. Brett in his Account 
oj Church Government^ Jj'c. p. Ill, 112. 



General Defence of Episcopacy 4 2SZ 

that Christianity was not instituted for the sake of the scrip- 
tures, but the scriptures, were written for the sake of Chris- 
tianity, that the church might have a certain rule to walk 
by; and therefore, when any church judges it more advan- 
tageous to be without the use of the scriptures, there is no- 
thing amiss in laying it aside, as the church of Rome has 
done, for what she is pleased to think the greater benefit 
of Christianity. By the same reasoning, the two sacra- 
ments of baptism and the Lord's supper, being instituted 
for the sake of Christianity, and as outward means of con- 
veying an inward grace, they too may safely enough be 
laid aside, when any body of pretended Christians shall feel 
themselves so inwardly moved by the spirit, as to stand in 
no need of such outward means of obtaining its grace and 
influence ; and the church of Rome is the less to be blamed 
for taking away the cup from the laity, since, according to 
Le Clerc's argument, she might have deprived them of the 
whole sacrament, had she thought it more for the advantage 
of the church so to do. 

These are modes of reasoning, to which, as advocates for 
the truth as it is in Christ, we can never be obliged to have 
recourse. We know, that the holy scriptures, and the sacred 
institutions of Christianity, were designed by its blessed 
Founder to be continued in his church, even unto the end 
of the world ; and, therefore, neither the church of Rome, 
nor any other church, ^an ever set aside the use of the 
scriptures, or the ministration of the sacraments, whole 
and entire, as they were instituted by Christ himself: And 
we see no reason why the same may not be said of the 
Episcopal government of the church, which, being ap- 
pointed by Christ himself, who had all power given him in 
heaven and earth for that purpose, cannot be set aside by 
any human authority, or on any pretence whatever. We 
do not say that Christianity was instituted for the sake of 
the outward polity of the church, or the church for the 
sake of the Episcopal order ; but we may justly say, what 



tS4> ' General Defence of Episcopacy, 

is plainly said in scripture, and was constantly professed in 
the purest ages of the gospel, that the belief of the " holy 
catholic church," being a part of the faith which Chris- 
tianity requires, and the Episcopal order a part of what 
we are taught to believe, concerning the constitution and 
government of the church, no separation must be attempted 
of what our God and Saviour has thus joined together. 
We must receive his scheme of salvation according to the 
plan and the terms on which he has offered it to us ; and 
notwithstanding all that Mr. Le Clerc and other writers of 
the same stamp have affimied to the contrary, we must 
conclude, that the necessity of Episcopal government is 
most undeniably proved, when we show that it was insti- 
tuted by Christ and his apostles, and continued to be the 
only form of church government for fifteen huntod years 
and upwards. 

The strength of the arguments which we have now beea 
liandling in defence of the apostolic Episcopacy, lies in this, 
undoubted truth, that the Christian priesthood is a divine 
positive institution, which, as it could have no beginning 
but by means of God's appointrnent, so neither could it 
be continued but in the way which he had been pleased to, 
appoint for its continuance. The apostolic practice plainly 
showed what the method was which God had chosen for 
that purpose : For Christ was in all that the apostles did, 
and God was " in Christ reconciling the world to himself." 
The ministry of this recp^iciliation was committed to the 
apostles ; and we have seen how that ministry was branched 
out into three distinct orders, and that the persons severally 
invested with them, towards the end of the apostolic age, 
were distinguished from ,each other by the appropriate titles 
of bishop, presbyter and deacon : A distinction which evi- 
dently took place in conformity with that which had been 
established in the Jewish church, of high priest, priest and 
Levite, That such a resemblance would appear between 
the Israelitish and Christian economy, may be justly in- 



General l5efence of Episcopacy, ^5$ 

ferred from this consideration, that the former was de- 
signed to be the figure and forerunner of the latter, and 
that the author of both was the same all-wise and merciful 
God, who would certainly contrive and order whatever was 
best for answering his own gracious purposes. This was a 
matter which could only be settled by divine wisdom and 
goodness, and, therefore, would not be left to the deter- 
mination of human prudence. For if it be true, as Dr. 
Campbell has affirmed it to be " certain, that one model 
of church government may be much better calculated for 
promoting the belief and obedience of the gospel than 
another," we may as certainly conclude that such a mode! 
would be prescribed by the divine Founder of the churchy 
as he knew to be best calculated for promoting the ends of 
infinite mercy and goodness. This was the object which 
he had in view, by appointing the orders of the ministry^ 
and regulating the whole sacred service under the dispen- 
sation of the law; and we cannot suppose that he would 
leave that of the gospel in an irregular or unsettled condi- 
tion, and not make sufficient provision for the permanent 
order and polity of that church which he came in person to 
establish and to build on such a rock, as that the gates of 
hell should not prevail against it. To say then " -with free- 
dom^^ as our Professor does, " that if a particular form of 
polity had been essential to the church, it had been laid 
down in another manner in the sacred books,''^ isj in our 
opinion, to speak with more freedom than is becoming on 
such a subject, especially when any person may see, who 
is not blinded by prejudice, that there is " a particular form 
of polity laid down in the sacred books," both in what our 
Lord said to his apostles^ and in what they did in conse- 
quence of his directions ; and all this laid down, if not in 
such a manner as Dr. Campbell would have dictated, yet so 
as to enable the primitive church perfectly to understand 

* Lecture tv. 



255 General Defence of Episcopacy.' 

the plan, and continue the form of polity which the apostles 
had begun, and which form, we have seen, was properly, 
and in the true sense of the word, Episcopal. 

If Dr. Campbell did not see this in the same light with 
us, and was disposed to put a different construction oa 
what is laid down in the sacred books, we can only regret 
this circumstance, as an additional evidence in support of 
his own observation, " that even good and learned men al- 
low their judgments to be warped by the sentiments and 
custom of the sect which they prefer; and the true partizan 
of whatever denomination, always inclines to correct the 
diction of the spirit by that of the party."^ Foreseeing, 
no doubt, that this would be more particularly the case, 
in the article of church government, our Lecturer proposed 
an appeal to those early writers, who, by his own account, 
as to what depends on testimony^ in explaining any part of 
scripture which is thought to be doubtful, " are in every 
case, wherein no particular passion can be suspected to 
have swayed them, to be preferred before modern inter- 
preters or annotators." Agreeing very cordially with him 
in this opinion, respecting the testimony of the fathers, Wfi 
have listened to the evidence of these unexceptionable wit- 
nesses, and have found it, from the general and uniform 
tenor of their writings, to be full and direct, in favour of 
apostolic Episcopacy, as the invariable form of govern- 
ment, which had obtained in the Christian church.— -This 
was a matter of fact, in relation to which their testimony 
could not be doubted ; and if we consider the nature of the 
thing, it was surely " a case, wherein no particular passion 
could be suspected to have swayed them." The apostolic 
institution of Episcopacy was a truth believed, and openly 
♦avowed, at a time when no worldly temptation could have 
operated in producing that belief, or supporting that " par- 
ticular form of ecclesiastic polity." There was no room 

* See hjs note on Mat. in. 11. —in his Translatim (f the Gospeis. 



General Defence of Episcopacy, 2S7 

for a spirit of pride or ambition to exert its influence on the 
minds of Christian pastors, when the highest office in the 
church, so far from securing to those invested with it any 
portion of worldly honour, or legal revenue, served only to 
expose them to a greater degree of reproach and poveriy. 
The station of a bishop was that of the most imminent dan- 
ger; and whoever possessed that degree of zeal and firm- 
ness which induced him to accept it, was almost certain, 
as soon as persecution commenced, to fall the first victim 
to the fury of his enemies. 

While the Episcopal character was thus held up, as the 
principal mark to be aimed at by the rage of heathen op- 
pression, we can hardly suppose that any other motive 
would have been sufficient to the undertaking an office so 
peculiarly encompassed by danger and difficulty, but the 
firm conviction of its being absolutely necessary to the 
maintenance of order and unity in the church, and to the 
preservation of that apostolic commission, from which must 
be derived, by regular succession, all the right that any 
man can have to minister in holy things. The form of this 
ministry, and the several degrees of office by which it has 
been always distinguished, we have now fully considered ; 
and by every argument adapted to the subject, we have seen 
it clearly evinced, that the constitution of the church, as 
established by its divine Founder, and given in charge to 
his chosen apostles, was by them transmitted to their 
several successors, and so handed down through the pri- 
mitive ages as a regular diocesan Episcopacy. This is the 
plain and important fact, which we have been endeavouring 
to establish as the second part of our plan, with all the ori- 
ginal evidence in its favour, which could be required from 
scripture, and all the additional testimony which has since 
been affi)rded to its support, by " ANTIQUITY, UNI- 
VERSALITY and CONSENT." We may therefore be 
allowed to recommend, as a matter of undoubted certainty, 
and worthy of the most serious consideration, what was 






258 General Defence of Episcopaty^ 

proposed as the title of this chapter—-" That the church of 
Christ, in which his religion is received and embraced, is 
that spiritual society in which the ministration of holy things 
i§ committed to the three distinct orders of bishops, pres- 
byters, and deacons, deriving their authority from the 
apostles, ^ those apo^tjes received their copimigsion fr<^ 
Christ.^' 



r 259* ) 



CHAPTER in. 

A Patt of this Holy^ Catholic^ and Apostolic Churchy though 
deprived of the Support of Civil Establishment ^ does still 
exist in this Country^ under the Name of the Scotch Epis- 
copal Church, whose Doctrine^ Discipline^ and Worship^ 
as happily agreeing with that of the first and purest Ages 
ef Christianity^ ought to be steadily adhered to by all who 
profess to be of the Episcopal Communion^ in this ParB 
of the Kingdom. 

xT IS a well known fact, that in all the nati6ns of the 
#orld, where any sense of a God or religion has been pre- 
served, certain persons have always been set apart, as the 
more immediate servants of that God, and for performing 
Ihe more solemn offices of his religion. The sacred function 
appropriated to these persons has, for the same reason, beeh 
ever considered as a divine and most salutary institution. 
This much may be gathered even from the dark records 
ef heathen antiquity. But, if, wishing for clearer informa- 
tion than these can aiford, we consult the sacred history, 
we shall find this matter set in a just and true light. The 
nature of the priesthood is there laid down in the plainest 
manner, the design of it fully explained, and its authority 
placed on the only proper foundation. The mediation of a 
Redeemer, as absolutely necessary to the salvation of 
mankind, is there held forth as the source of that typical 
priesthood, and those figurative sacrifices, which the law of 
God appointed and required, in all that period which pre- 
ceded the incarnation of the promised Saviour.-— It was 
from their relation to him, and dependence on him, that both 
priests and sacrifices derived all their honour and efficacy : 
And when at last this glorious Intercessor " appeared upon 



260 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 

earth, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself," we are 
assured, that " he did not glorify himself to be made an 
High Priest, but received this honour from his Father that 
sent him, and was called of God, as was Aaron."* In 
consequence of this high and heavenly commission, he 
stood forth as the great High Priest of our profession, 
and having purchased his church with his own blood, he 
not only " died, but rose again, that he might be Lord both 
of the dead and of the living." It was, therefore, after his 
resurrection that he was heard to declare, that " all power 
was given unto him in heaven and in earth ;" and with this 
declaration he introduced the commission which he then 
gave his apostles, delegating to them such a portion of his 
power as was necessary for authorizing them to convert the 
nations to his faith, and teach them to observe whatever he 
had commanded, even unto the end of the world. From 
the extent of time allotted to the execution of this commis- 
sion, we may see, it was impossible for the apostles to ex- 
ecute it fully, and to that extent, in their own persons, oi' 
in any other way, than by doing what they could them- 
selves, and transmitting to others the same charge, which 
they had received, that so a succession of such commis- 
sioned officers might be continued in the church, to the 
end of time. 

The manner in which this succession has been carried 
on, and the certainty of its having met with no breach or 
interruption, from the days of the apostles to the present 
time, have both, we presume, been sufficiently established 
in the preceding chapter, which has also exhibited the most 
ample and satisfactory evidence, to prove the apostolic in- 
stitution of the three distinct orders of bishops, presby- 
ters, and deacons, to whom the Christian ministry was 
originally committed, and by whom, according to their 
several degrees of office, it has always been exercised in 

* Heb. V, 4, 5. 



Paniadar Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 261 

every sound and regular part of the Christian church. 
Those who have opposed this form of ecclesiastical polity, 
have often been challenged to produce evidence of any na- 
tional or provincial church, existing v/ithout it, for fifteen 
hundred years after the first publication of the Christian 
faith. The corruptions, which, for a great part of that 
period, unhappily prevailed in the Western nations, did 
not, and could not affect the validity of the apostolic com- 
mission, or put an end to the ministerial power, which it 
was designed to convey. The church of Rome, with all 
the errors and abuses cleaving to it, which made the re- 
formation necessary, did not cease to be a church, anv more 

ft 
than a man, whose soul is corrupted by vice, and his body 

marred by disease, ceases to be a man, while his soul and 
body continue united. It often happened that the Jew- 
ish church was sadly infected with idolatry, and addicted 
to many enormities, which provoked to anger the Lord 
their God; yet they still continued a visible church upon 
earth, till he at last thought proper to remove their candle- 
stick, and allowed " the Romans to come and take away 
their place and nation." Though he frequently raised up 
prophets to warn them of their danger, and call them to 
repentance, yet he never instituted a new order of priests, 
nor authorized any but the sons of Aaron, to appear in 
his holy place, and offer the sacrifices prescribed by the 
law. Their corruptions did not divest them of the priest- 
hood, nor make any breach in the order of succession, till 
it was completely taken away, and their whole economy 
dissolved. And so the church of Rome, while permitted 
to retain a succession of the Christian priesthood, by its 
preservation of the Episcopal order, must also have the 
power of conferring that order, although it could have no 
power to prevent those who had thus received their Epis- 
copal succession, from doing all they could to reform the 
abuses, which had gradually crept into that degenerate part 
of the Christian church. 



262 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 

This is all that can properly be meant by the term te^ 
formation^ which does not lead to the idea of making a 
new church, a thing we can no more do than make a new 
bible, but only to that of correcting and amending the old 
one, and so replacing it in a state of conformity to the ori- 
ginal standard. But the succession of pastors in the three 
sacred orders of bishops, presbyters and deacons, was none 
of the inventions of popery. It was the continuance of an 
apostolic institution, which had spread itself over the wholfe 
Christian world, even to this remote island of Britain, long 
before the corrupting influence of the church of Rome had 
obtained any footing in it.— ^- When Augustin the Monk was 
sent over by Pope Gregory to convert the Saxon invaders, 
he found an Episcopal church in Britain, regularly consti- 
tuted according to the primitive model. And when, many 
centuries after, the church of England came at last to en- 
gage in the happy work of reformation, which she did most 
seriously and successfully, she only returned to the exercise 
of her original rights, as an independent national church* 
It was on this footing that she threw off the yoke, under 
which she had so long bowed to the papal tyranny. But 
when she thus separated from the corruptions of Rome, she 
did not also throw off a just regard to the doctrines and in- 
stitutions of the church of Christ. — Her reformed bishops 
saw the necessity of continuing that Episcopal ordination 
v/hich they themselves had duly received : And Archbi- 
shop Parker having been regularly consecrated by four ot 
these bishops, on the 17th of December, 1559, and placed 
by Queen Elizabeth in the see of Canterbury, the public re- 
gisters will show not only the year, month and day when^ 
but also the persons by whom, every particular bishop has 
been consecrated, from that period to the present time. 

Such is the regular manner in which the Episcopal suc-^ 
cession has been canonically carried on, and can be clearly 
traced, in the church of England: And it is also well 
knownj that on two remarkable occasions, has that church 



Paf$im!af Defince of the J^piscQpacy of Scotland. 263 

^(^tributed her friendly aid to preserve the same succession 
in her sister-church of Scotland. After the reforming party 
in this country had gone on for a course of years, with 
aiuch noise and tumult, establishing and altering their va- 
rious plans of church government, King James, at last, hav* 
ing succeeded to the crown of England, was enabled to put 
matters on a more decent and regular footing. For that 
purpose, having desired three of those persons who had 
been nominated to bishopricks in Scotland, to repair to 
London, he told them at their first audience, " that he had 
with great charge recovered the temporalities of the church 
out of lay hands, and bestowed them, as he hoped, upon 
worthy persons ; but as he could not make them bishops, 
nor could they assume that honour to themseleves, he had 
therefore called them to England, to receive regular conse- 
cration from the bishops there, that on their return home, 
they might communicate the same to the rest, and thereby 
atop the mouths of adversaries of all denominations."* 
These three persons were accordingly consecrated on the 
21st of October, 1610, by the bishops of London, Ely^and 
Bath ; and on their return to Scotland, communicated the 
Episcopal powers which they had now received in a right 
and canonical manner, to their former titular brethren ; by 
which means a regular Episcopacy was introduced into the 
reformed church of Scotland, and continued to enjoy the 
sanction of legal establishment, till the troubles broke out 
in the reign of Charles the First, when the church was 
again thrown into the utmost confusion, and a " solemn 
league and covenant was entered into for effecting the en- 
tire extirpation of '' prelacy, or the government of the 
church by archbishops and bishops, and all the ecclesiasti- 
cal officers depending on that hierarchy." 

Things continued in this disordered and ruinous state, 
till the restoration of Charles the Second ; on which happy 

* See Skinner's Eccksiastlcal History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 251. 



264 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 

event, the Church of England immediately revived, and 
showed herself worthy of the distinguished place she had 
always held among the reformed churches. Her esta- 
blished rank and splendour were restored to her. Nine of 
her bishops had survived the late calamities, of whom the 
worthy bishop of London, Dr. Juxon, who had attended 
his dying sovereign on the scaffold, was promoted to the 
see of Canterbury. The other eight took possession of 
their former bishopricks, and the rest of the sees that had 
been vacant, were soon filled with learned and able pre- 
lates. A similar resolution was adopted by government, 
with regard to Scotland ; but before Episcopacy could be 
restored in this country, the necessity of the case required 
that application should again be made to the English 
church for assistance. The Scottish bishops, who had been 
driven into exile by the violence of the times, had all died, 
except one, without being able to provide for the Episcopal 
succession. It was therefore determined, by those who 
had the object at heart, that this necessary provision should 
be made, by having recourse to the same expedient which 
had been adopted about fifty years before ; and, accordingly 
four of the persons who had been nominated for the Scot- 
tish Episcopate, were consecrated at London, on the 15th 
of December, 1661, by four of the English bishops.^ 

* In the year 1789, Bishop Abernethy Drummond, Bishop Strachan, 
and 1, being at London, soliciting relief to our church from certain 
penal statutes ; at the desire of Bishop Seabury, of Connecticut, who 
some years before had been consecrated by the bishops in Scotland, we 
applied to the archbishop of Canterbury for an attested extract of the 
consecration of the Scotch bishops in 1661, and through his Grace's con- 
descending attention, received what follows — 

" Extract from the Register-book of Archbishop Juxon, in the library 

of his Grace, the archbishop of Canterbury, at Lambeth palace" — 

Fol. 237. 

*' It appears — that James Sharpe was consecrated archbishop of St. 

Andrews, Andrew Fairfull archbishop of Glasgow, Robert Leighton 

bishop of Dunblenen, and James Hamilton bishop of Galloway, on the 

15th day of December, 1661, in St. Teter's church, Westminster, by 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 265 

But neither on this, nor on the former occasion, did any of 
the two archbishops officiate ; lest their presiding at the 
consecration should have been considered as claiming from 
the church of Scotland, the acknowledgment of any sub- 
jection to the metropolitical sees of Canterbury or York. 
On returning to Scotland the four newly consecrated pre- 
lates took possession of the several sees to which they had 
been appointed, and the other ten bishopricks were after- 
wards conferred on the persons, who for that purpose had 
received consecration from their hands. 

Thus was Episcopacy once more restored in Scotland, 
and continued to be the established form of church govern- 
ment, till the revolution took place in 1688, when the bi- 
shops unanimously refusing to comply with that change, 
and to renounce the allegiance which they had sworn to 
King James, were obhged to suffer the consequences of 
such refusal ; and however imprudent their conduct may 
appear in a worldly view, it is evident, from the sacrifices 
which they made, that they acted with integrity, and from 
the most disinterested and conscientious motives. But whe- 
ther it was owing to the offensive principles maintained by 
the bishops and their followers, or rather to that article in 
the Claim of Right set up by the convention of the estates of 
Scotland, which declared *' prelacy^ or any sort of Episco- 
pal superiority^ to be a great and insupportable grievance 
and trouble to this nation j" — v/hichever of these causes 
operated most powerfully in producing the designed effect, 
so it was, that the same convention, having been turned 
into a parliament, passed an act on the 22d of July, 1689, 
for " abolishing prelacy, and all superiority of any office in 
the church of this kingdom above presbyters," — In conse- 

Gilbert, bishop of London, commissary to the archbishop of Canterbury, 
and that the Right Rev. George, bishop of Worcester, John, bishop of 
Carlisle, and Hugh, bishop of Landalf, were present and assisting. 

'* Extracted this 3d day of June, 1789, by me, William Di^kes, Se- 
cretary." 

^4 



266 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

quence of this abolition, which was followed, the year aftei% 
by the establishment of the presbyterian form of church 
government, the bishops were deprived of every thing 
connected with their office, which the civil power could 
take from them. They lost their revenues, and tempor^ 
jurisdiction ; but their spiritual authority still remained, 
and that "gift of God," which they had received by the 
imposition of Episcopal hands, they considered themselves 
bound to exercise for promoting that Episcopal " work in 
the church of God, which had been committed to them." 
By virtue of this commission, they continued, in a quiet 
and peaceable manner, to discharge the duties of their 
spiritual function. They ordained ministers for such 
vacant congregations as adhered to their communion ; and 
when they saw it necessary to attend to the preservation of 
their own order, they proceeded to the consecration of such 
persons as were thought most proper for being invested 
with that sacred and important trust.—- We have also to 
observe, that all the ordinations and consecrations which 
have taken place in the Scotch Episcopal church, since the 
sera of the revolution, have been and still are invariably 
performed, as we have reason to believe they were from 
the Restoration to that period, according to the " form and 
manner of ordaining and consecrating" prescribed by the 
church of England. All this having been duly attended 
to, by the prelates who were ejected from their sees at the 
revolution, and by those whom they and their successors 
promoted to the order of bishops, it is evident that every 
thing has been done, which could be deemed necessary for 
preserving a regular Episcopal succession in Scotland \ as 
may be seen from a list of the consecrations of Scotch bi- 
shops from the revolution to the present time, which is 
subjoined in an appendix to this work.^ 

It was, no doubt, from his knowledge of these matters, 

* See Appendix, No. I. 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 267 

and of the care which has been taken to support an Episco- 
pal church in this part of the kingdom, though deprived of 
the aid of civil establishment, that Dr. Campbell was led to 
introduce one of his Lectures^ on Ecclesiastical History^ by 
observing, that he should not have thought it necessary " to 
be so particular as he had been, in ascertaining the nature 
of that polity which obtained in the primitive church, were 
not this a matter that is made a principal foundation of dis- 
sent by a pretty numerous sect in this country :" by which 
secty it is plain that he means the Scotch Episcopal church, 
from what immediately follows. — " I do not," he says, 
*' here allude to those amongst us, who barely prefer the 
Episcopal form of government, whom, in general, as far as 
I have had occasion to know them, I have found moderate 
and reasonable in their sentiments on this subject. Such do 
not pretend that the external model of the church (what- 
ever they may think of the antiquity of theirs) is of the 
essence of religion." 

If by thus making a distinction between the two Episco- 
pal " sects*"* in this country, our Professor meant to pay a 
compliment to the one at the expense of the other, it does 
not appear that the peculiarity of sentiment, which he has 
held forth as the mark of distinction, was the most proper 
for answering his purpose. It is generally thought, that the 
*' foundation of dissent" from that which, in any country, 
is by law established, ought to be laid in something that " is 
of the essence of religion," or at least supposed to be so by 
the dissenting party. And such is our opinion of the neces- 
sity of maintaining unity and concord among all " who pro- 
fess and call themselves Christians," that we should hold 
ourselves highly culpable in keeping up a separate commu- 
nion from that which has the law of our country on its 
side, were it not for the sake of things which we believe to 
be essential to our religion, and a part of that apostolic doc- 

* See Lecture viii. 



26^ Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 

trine, to which, as Christians, we must steackfastly adhere^ 
If there be any amongst us, as it seems Dr. Campbell had 
" occasion to know, who barely prefer the Episcopal form: 
of government," on account perhaps of its antiquity, but 
without considering it as at all necessary to the being of a 
church ; whatever may be said of such people's moderation^ 
we see no ground for distinguishing them as " reasonable 
in their sentiments," if they had no better reason to justify 
their separation from the establishment of their country^ 
and no other benefit from the Episcopal form of govern- 
ment^ but what arises from the ministrations of clergy, who 
have been Episcopally ordained, but otherwise acknowledge 
no such government* The reflection, therefore, w^hich, it 
would seem. Dr. Campbell was desirous to cast on one of 
the Episcopal " sects" in this country, will be found more 
applicable to the sentiments which he has ascribed to the 
other, and by marking which as " moderate and reasonable," 
he, no doubt, intended to keep up that unnecessary distinc- 
tion between the Scotch and English Episcopacy, v/hich 
has already subsisted too long, but ought to afford no more 
room for such disagreeable and unworthy comparisons. 

All this, however, and more of the same kind, of which 
we have been obliged to take some notice, appears but as 
slight skirmishing, when compared to the grand battery, 
which was at last to be opened against the shattered but 
venerable remains of the old Episcopal church of Scotland. 
We had seen preparations making for this hostile attack, 
in the beginning of our Professor'* Eleventh Lecture^ where, 
after some general remarks to show, in his way, that the 
terms ordination and appointment to a particular pastoral 
charge^ were at first perfectly synonymous, he adds, " If 
one, however, in those truly primitive times, (which but 
rarely happened), found it necessary to retire from the 
work, he never thought of retaining either the title or the 
emoluments. — To be made a bishop, and in being so, to 
receive no charge whatever, to have no work to execute. 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 269 

could have been regarded no otherwise, than as a contra- 
diction in terms. Indeed, the name of the office implied 
the service, without which it could not subsist, that is, 
without which there was no office. The name bishop 
means overseer, and this is a term manifestly correlative 
to that which expresses the thing to be overseen. The 
connection is equally necessaiy and essential as between 
father and child, sovereign and subject, husband and wife. 
The one is inconceivable without the other. Ye cannot 
make a man an overseer, to whom ye give no oversight, 
no more than ye can make a man a shepherd, to whom ye 
give the charge of no sheep, or a husband, to whom ye 
give no wife. Nay, in fact, as a man ceases to be a hus- 
band the moment he ceases to have a wife, and is no 
longer a shepherd than he has the care of sheep, so in the 
only proper and original import of the words, a bishop 
continues a bishop onlv whilst he continues to have people 
under his spiritual care."^ 

These are the general principles which our Lecturer laid 
down, as the ground of a long satyrical strain of declama- 
tion, for it can hardly be called reasoning, against the 
Episcopal succession in Scotland; that regular and orderly 
succession, for the validity of which we have appealed to 
undoubted vouchers, those ecclesiastical registers, which 
can at any time be shown for the satisfaction of all con- 
cerned. But before we come to consider the particular 
application, which our Professor has made of these his 
*' self-evident propositions," to the case of what he calls— 
" the Scotch Episcopal party," let us inquire a little into 
the foundation of his supposed analogies, and see what 
would be the consequence of those ieferences, which he 
intended should be drawn from them. The most likely 
one of any to be admitted as a parallel case to the connec- 
tion between a bishop and his spiritual charge, is that which 

* Lecture xi. 



^fO Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

subsists between " sovereign and subject," the connection 
in both cases arising from appointment to an office, although 
it must be owned, that the mode of appointment is very 
different, as well as the object about which each of these 
offices is exercised. Our Lecturer, however, was fond of 
this allusion— and asked—" For example, what would one 
think of the pretext of making a man a king, without giv- 
ing him either subjects or a kingdom ?"^ We should cer- 
tainly think the pretext very foolish, and the thing itself as 
unlikely to happen : Since these king-makers, a privilege 
which some people are always glad to keep in view, might 
themselves become the subjects, and their lands would of 
course be the kingdom. — But the Doctor adds^ — ^" Ye will 
say, may not the right to a kingdom be conferred on a man, 
whom we cannot put in possession ?" This he readily 
admits, but insists that it " is not parallel to the case in 
hand." Yet why not parallel, when those who have a right 
to make a bishop, surely give him a right, when so made, 
to exercise his office in any part of the world, where he can 
do so, without encroaching on the charge or right of ano- 
ther bishop; and it will not be said that the right to a king- 
dom can be conferred but on similar terms. Possession 
may be obtained by force, but right is of a more delicate 
nature. During all the time of Cromwell's usurpation, 
Charles the Second was acknowledged as their rightful 
king, by all the loyal part of his subjects ; and the length 
of his reign has been always computed from the day of his 
father's death, although it was eleven years before his res- 
toration gave him the actual exercise of his kingly power. 
-—So might a bishop be invested with Episcopal authority, 
although placed in a situation which would neither require 
nor admit the exercise of it. 

The allusion which our Lecturer makes use of, to the 
connection between father and child, and between husband 

* Lecture xl. 



/ 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. ^71 

and wife, is by no means suited to the case in hand, as these 
are mere states or conditions of hfe, the nature of which is 
very different from that of an office, the former depending 
altogether on a particular relation, whereas the permanency 
of the latter will be often found to rest on a more general 
footing. Such is evidently the case with regard to the office 
of a shepherd, which, as applied to the Episcopal character, 
does not necessarily infer an immediate charge of a flock, 
since there may be other subjects of inspection that come 
not properly within the idea, which that term conve)^s. 
When, therefore, our Professor, wishing to ridicule the 
notion of a bishop in partibus infdelium^ observed that " a 
bishop's charge being a church, and a church consisting 
only of believers, infidels are properly no part of his charge, 
no more than wolves or foxes are part of the flock of a 
shepherd," we are surprised that so complete an analogist 
did not recollect, that infidels may become believers, but 
wolves and foxes can never become sheep. Will any one 
say, that to make believers of infidels is no part of the of- 
fice of a bishop, or that his office immediately ceases, when 
his Idaours in that way are no longer successful ? If such 
were the precarious nature of the shepherd's office, it would 
hardly have been applied to point out the highest possible 
instance of pastoral care, and we should not have read of 
*' sheep going astray, and afterwards returning to the Shep- 
herd and bishop of their souls." 

The only analogy, therefore, which seems at all applica- 
ble to the design in view, is that which our Professor 
makes use of, when he says—-" Ye cannot make a man an 
overseer, to whom ye give no oversight ;" and this is sup- 
posed to arise from the name bishop or overseer^ as con- 
nected with, and requiring, things or persons to be over- 
seen. He might, however, have remembered his own ob- 
servation, that " the import of words gradually changes 
with the manners of the times ;" as a proof of which, the 
word presbifter has certainly iQst the import which he him- 



272 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland 

self assigned to it, as a " title of respect," denoting a sena- 
tor or elderly person, since it would now be thought ridicu- 
lous, instead of " ordaining or making a presbyter," to 
speak of " ordaining or making a respectable old man;" 
and may not the same change have happened in the applica- 
tion of the name bishop or overseer^ even supposing its ori- 
ginal import to have been " inspector of a particular 
flock ?" Of this, however, the Professor brings no sort of 
proof, but runs on, in his usual declamatory style, exp^iat- 
ing on his favourite topic, that " a bishop continued a 
bishop only whilst he continued to have people under his 
pastoral charge, and where no such charge was given, ordi- 
nation appeared but a mere illusion, the name without the 
thing. For nothing can be plainer," says he, " than that 
as yet," that is, in the fifth century, " they had no concep- 
tion of the mystic character impressed by the bishop's hand 
in ordaining, which no power on earth can cancel."^ A 
little after he tells us, that " the doctrine of the character 
had not yet been discovered ;" and prosecuting still far- 
ther his strained analogy between marriage and ordination, 
he boldly asks — " What then is there in the one ceremony 
more nugatory than in the other? For if unmeaning words 
will satisfy, why may not the mystical, invisible, indelible 
character of husband be imprinted by the first, as that of 
priest or bishop is by the second ? Holy writ gives just as 
much countenance to the one, as to the other."')' 

This, we think, is rather rashly affirmed ; and the lan- 
guage made use of in delivering such a strange opinion, 
appears to us as void of delicacy, as inconsistent with the 
character, which ought to be maintained by every professor 
of Christian divinity. Is it really suitable to such a profes- 
sion, even to suppose, much more to assert, that there is 
nothing given in and by apostolical, primitive, regular ordr- 
natioDj but such a bare " assignment to some particular 

* Lecture xi, f Lectur^ xi. 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 273 

congregation," as is perfectly similar to the connection be- 
tween husband and wife ? What then are we to understand 
by the gift {^cc^tcixcx^ which St. Paul twice mentions as in 
Timothy, and in both places ascribes it — ^to " the laying on 
of hands?" Does this point to any thing like his " assign- 
ment to a particular congregation," or to any sort of connec- 
tion with a pastoral charge ? Have we not more reason to 
believe, that this charisma or gift meant something, which, 
notwithstanding Dr. Campbell's sarcastic way of treating it, 
might be called a " character impressed" by imposition of 
hands, and which Timothy was '^ not to neglect, but to stir 
up" and put into exercise, so as to answer the good purpose 
for which he had received it t We know, that the charis^ 
mata^ or gifts so often mentioned ^s peculiar to the early 
ages of the gospel, have been generally thought to denote 
the miraculous powers with which many of the primitive 
Christians were endowed, even down to that period, when 
our adversaries are obliged to acknowledge that a true and 
proper Episcopacy universally prevailed. Yet as we are 
not told of any miraculous works performed by Timothy in 
consequence of the gift which was in him ; and as it is ex- 
pressly said to have been placed there by the imposition of 
hands, and that it might be stirred up in the work of the 
ministry, to which he had been appointed, we have every 
reason to conclude, that it referred entirely to his ordina- 
tion, not as an " assignment to some particular congrega- 
tion," but as giving him authority to execute his office in 
any congregation, or any part of the flock of Christ, which 
might be committed to his charge, 

Such, we have ground to believe, was the apostolic prac- 
tjice, founded on the nature of the commission which the 
apostles themselves received from Christ, as extending to 
all nations, and all ages of the world. It was, therefore, a 
maxim universally received in the primitive church, that 
every bishop, as one of the successors of these aposdes, 
had a pastoral relation to the whole catholic church, aii4 

35 



274 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 

that the Episcopal body was thus widely diffused, for the 
mutual benefit of all its members, that if any one fell into 
heresy, others might be at hand to redress^ the mischief. 
Writing to the bishop of Rome on this very subject, Cy- 
prian tells him — " Therefore is our body of bishops so 
large, and yet so joined together in the bond of unity, and 
cemented by mutual agreement, that if any one of our college 
should attempt to introduce heresy, and so tear in pieces 
and lay waste the flock of Christ, others should step in to 
its assistance, and like tender and useful shepherds, gather 
our Lord's sheep into his fold. — For though we are many 
shepherds, yet we have but one flock to feed, and all the 
sheep which Christ has purchased with his blood and passion, 
we ought to gather together and cherish."^ From these 
words of Cyprian, and man)^ other passages of his writings, 
it would appear, that he considered the college or corporation 
of bishops, as founded for the purpose of propagating the 
Christian faith throughout the world, and preserving it in 
its original purity. And though the division of the church 
into dioceses, and the placing local bishops over them, be- 
came necessary for the sake of order, and for preventing 
any improper interference with each others conduct ; yet 
when the faith of the church was in danger of being lost, 
or corrupted by the prevalence of any pestilent heresy, 
every bishop was to consider himself as an universal pas- 
tor, and to do every thing in his power for preserving the 
soundness, and promoting the welfare of the whole body. 
Such being evidently the opinion entertained by Cyprian, of 
what he calls the " one Episcopate, of which every bishop 



* " Idcirco copiosum est corpus sacerdotum, concordise mutuse glutino 
atque unitatis vinculo copulatum, ut si quis ex collegio nostro hssfesin fa- 
cere, et gregem Christi lacerare et vastare tentaverit, subveniant cseteri, 
et quasi pastores utiles et misericordes eves Dominicas in gregem colligant. 
Nam etsi pastores inulti sumus, unum tamen gregem pascimus, et oves 
universas, quas Christus sanguine suo et passione quxsivit, coUigere et 
fovere debemus." Cypr. epist. 67. ad Steph. 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 2Y3 

holds a share for the benefit of the whole," we are indeed 
surprised to find Dr. Campbell quoting this very pas- 
sage, in support of the opposite notion, which he so warmly 
espoused, that a bishop is to be considered as nothing more 
than the *' pastor of a particular church or congregation," 
his " assignment" to which is all that is meant by ordina- 
tion, and without which, it seems, he could have no share 
in the " one Episcopate," which yet St. Cyprian so zea- 
lously maintained to be held in common by the whole body 
of bishops, and therefore held by them, in virtue of their 
ordination or appointment to the Episcopal office, and not 
of their " assignment" to any particular charge. 

It was proper that we should take notice of all this pre- 
paration which our Professor had made for effecting what 
seems to have been the principal purpose of the Lecture 
now before us, the bringing forward his heavy charge 
against the orders of the Scotch Episcopal church, which, 
after all that he had said by way of introduction to it, he 
still thought might probably excite some surprise, as well 
from the novelty of it, as by the confident and peremptory 
manner, in which he meant to support it. In both these 
respects, we do think it was sufficiently calculated to pro- 
duce surprise in the minds of all who might esteem it wor- 
thy of their consideration, on account of the station and 
character of its author. Had the Principal of Marischal 
College boldly asserted, that a civil establishment being es- 
sential to the very being of Episcopal government, it is im- 
possible that the order of bishops can be continued in a 
church which is not supported by the state : It would have 
been saying no more, than what had been said before by 
men equally high in office, and well versed in all sorts of 
knowledge, except that of the nature and constitution of 
the Christian church. Or had Dr. Campbell, who was 
early bred to the study of the law, given it as his opinion, 
that the act of parliament which abolished Episcopacy in 
Scotland, or some restricting statute afterward enacted, had 



^Sys Pariiciilaf Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 

actually deprived the ejected bishops of their whole spi-* 
ritual power, and left them no authority even to ordain 
priests and deacons, far less to consecrate bishops as their 
successors in these powers ; this would have been only re*- 
peating the absurdities of those Erastian writers, whd 
would make the civil power superior to apostolic institution, 
and allow an authority merely human, to annihilate the di- 
vine commission granted by him who has all power in 
heaven and in earth. In all this there would have been no- 
thing new or surprising, however inconsistent with the cha- 
racter of a Christian divine 5 because such inconsistencies 
have often appeared, and been suffered to pass as liberal 
sentiments, flowing from a mind unfettered by any profes- 
sional prejudice* 

What method then has our Professor taken to support 
his strange attack on the depressed but pure and primitive 
Episcopacy, which still subsists in this part of the united 
kingdom ? Does he pretend to say, that the bishops of Scot- 
land, who were deprived of their legal power and privi- 
leges, in consequence of the Revolution in 1688, considered 
themselves as equally divested of all spiritual authority, 
and therefore took no measures for continuing a needless 
succession of bishops in a church so suddenly and com- 
pletely cut off, as that of Scotland then was, from all its 
former connection with the state ? No : even Dr. Camp- 
bell admits, that the ejected bishops, dispersed and perse- 
cuted as they were, continued their care of the Episcopal 
succession, and ordained several bishops, in order to pre* 
serve it.— -But the misfortune, or rather the folly, as he 
thinks it, was — these new bishops " were ordained at 
large;" and because they had not h^^n previously appointed 
each to a certain diocese, or had riot received what he 
would call " assignment to a particular charge," he main^ 
tains^ with dictatorial authority, that their ordinations were 
null and void, yea, no other than farcical ceremonies, m. 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 27 f 

which the actors played the fool, for the purpose of impos* 
ing on others. 

When those, from whom the present clergy of the Scotch 
Episcopal church derive their orders, were known to be 
men of such unblemished integrity, and disinterested zeal, 
as to induce them to suffer the loss of all their worldly dig- 
nities and emoluments, for the sake of what they esteemed 
to be infinitely more Valuable, truth and a good conscience, 
it is hard to hear them reviled as no better than formal 
hypocrites, striving to deceive others, and acting a most ri* 
diculous farce in pretending to discharge one of the most 
solemn functions of their sacred office. It is no less 
surprising, that such a severe accusation should be pub^ 
iished, as coming from a man, who, among his own friends, 
was much admired for his meekness and moderation, and 
what the world calls liberality of mind. Lest, therefore, we 
should be suspected of doing injustice to his character, a 
thing which it particularly becomes us to avoid, when he is 
no longer able to stand up in its defence, we shall give the 
indictment brought against those whom he calls " our 
Scotch Episcopal party," in their accuser's own words* 
After quoting some authorities, to show the abuse of those 
loose ordinations, chiefly of presbyters, which were begin- 
ning to take place in the fifth century, he proceeds thus^ — 

" One will perhaps be surprised to hear, that our Scotch 
Episcopal party, who have long affected to value themselves 
on the regular transmission of their orders, have none but 
what they derive from bishops merely nominal. I do not 
mention this with a view to derogate from their powers, but 
only as an argumentum ad hominein^ to show how much 
their principles militate against themselves. It does not 
suit my notion of Christianity to retaliate on any sect, or 
to forbid any to cast out devils in the name of Christ, be- 
cause they follow not us. If the lust of power had not 

* Lecture xi. 



2f 8 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland^ 

with churchmen more influence than the spirit of the gospel, 
greater attention would have been given to the decision of 
their Master in a hke case. Even their own writers ac- 
knowledge, that immediately after the death of Dr- Ross^ 
bishop of Edinburgh, the last of those ordained before the 
Revolution, there were no local bishops in Scodand, not 
one appointed to any diocese, or having the inspection of 
any people, or spiritual jurisdiction over any district. But 
there were bishops who had been ordained at large, some 
by bishop Ross, others by some of the Scotch bishops, who, 
after the Revolution, had retired to England. The warm- 
est partizans of that sect have not scrupled to own, that at 
that gentleman's decease, all the dioceses of Scotland were 
become vacant, and even to denominate those who had 
been ordained in the manner above mentioned, Utopian 
bishops, a title not differing materially from that I have 
given them, merely nominal bishops^ for as far as I can 
learn, they were not titular even in the lowest sense. No 
axiom in philosophy is more indisputable than that quod 
nullibi est non e*f.— The ordination, therefore, of our pre- 
sent Scotch Episcopal clergy, is solely from presbyters ; 
for it is allowed, that those men, who came under the 
hands of bishop Ross, had been regularly admitted minis- 
ters or presbyters, in particular congregations, before the 
Revolution. And to that first ordination, I maintain, that 
their farcical consecration by Doctor Ross and others, when 
they were solemnly made the depositaries of no deposit, 
commanded to be diligent in doing no work, vigilant in the 
oversight of no flock, assiduous in teaching and governing 
no people, and presiding in no church, added nothing at 
all." 

Such is the ludicrous manner in which our Lecturer 
thought proper to represent a sacred and solemn office, 
performed by men of piety and worth, whatever may be 
thought of their worldly wisdom, and whose conduct in 
this affair ought not, we humbly think, to have been thus 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 279 

held up as an object of ridicule, and so wantonly exposed 
to scorn and contempt. To add to the mockery too, he 
would not have it thought, that " it suited his notion of 
Christianity to retaliate on any sect, or to forbid any to cast 
out devils in the name of Christ, because they followed 
not his party." He had before been quoting the passage of 
scripture, which mentioned the occurrence that occasioned 
this remark, and had made the following observation upon 
it. " The apostles still retained too much of the Jewish 
spirit, not to consider more the party than the cause. * He 
followeth not us ;' a reason which to this day, alas ! would 
be thought the best reason in the world by most Christian 
sects, and by every individual who possesses the spirit of 
the sectary."^ And is all this particularly levelled at the 
" Scotch Episcopal party," as if they were peculiarly pos- 
sessed of this sectarian spirit ? Let a miracle, such as 
casting out devils in the name of Christ, be wrought as 
really and visibly as in the instance referred to, (for the apos- 
tles acknowledged that they saw it) and we can safely affirm 
that not an individual of our sect would dare to forbid such 
a thing, any more than Dr. Campbell himself would have 
done. But he certainly knew that there might be pre^ 
tenders to this miraculous power, who might use the name 
of Christ, without any " pious intention to promote his 
cause," of which we have a striking instance in the case of 
those " vagabond Jews, exorcists, who took upon them to 
call over them which had evil spirits, the name of the 
Lord Jesus," and were justly punished for their impious 
presumption.^ 

With an appearance, however, of candour and modera- 
tion, our Professor told his pupils, that what he had men- 
tioned, or was going to mention, respecting the " Scotch 
Episcopal party," was " with no view to derogate from their 
powers :" to which we shall only beg leave to apply his own 

* Lecture iv. f Acts xix, 13— IT. 



580 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of iScotland 

remark on the conduct of David Hume in a similar case— - 
" Was ever so rough an assault preceded by so smooth a 
preamble ?"* For in what way could he have more eiFeC'^ 
tuaUy " derogated from their powers," than by representing 
what he thought the source of these powers, as no better 
than 2L farcical ceremony, which " added nothing to the first 
ordination" of those on whom it was performed, and " from 
whom was particularly withheld the right of transmitting 
orders to others ?" If this be the " argumentum ad homi- 
nem''^ made use of " to show, how much the principles of 
the Scotch Episcopalians militate against themselves," the 
application of the argument ought to have been properly 
pointed out, and these hostile principles particularly speci- 
fied : And as this has not been done, it may be presumed, 
that the learned Professor knew as little of the principles of 
these Episcopalians, as they perhaps know of his " notion 
of Christianity," and the propriety of the method which he 
has here taken to support it. 

In this state of uncertainty, with regard to the applica- 
tion and strength of his reasoning, we are led by some cir- 
cumstances to conjecture, that the argument alluded to, as 
so happily brought home to the " Scotch Episcopal party," 
may probably be drawn from the canon of an ancient coun- 
cil, which he has quoted and commented on, as particu- 
larly applicable to the case in hand, and to the sentiments 
of a " party," who are supposed to hold in peculiar rever- 
ence every thing that is truly primitive in ecclesiastical ad- 
ministration. The canon referred to, is the 6th of the 
general council of Chalcedon, in which he says, " all such 
loose ordinations, of bishops at large without a diocese, 
are declared, I say not irregular or uncanonical, but abso- 
lutely null :" And to give the more weight to this canon, 
he adds the decision of Leo, a contemporary pope, or bishop 
of Rome, who, he says, " on account of his writings, i^ 

* Dissertation on Miracles, p. 243. 



Fartiailar Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 28 X 

considered as a doctor of the church, and affirms posU 
lively in one of his letters, that the ordination is to be 
counted vain, or of no effect, which is neither founded in 
place, nor fortified by authority." The first of these clauses 
our Doctor explains so as to make it suit his own purpose, 
but takes no farther notice of the second, which requires 
authority in the ordainer, to give validity to the ordination, 
in whatever place the person ordained niay be called to e?^ 
ercise his niinistry, 

In his ne;^t Jecture we find our Professor endeavouring 
to procure stiU farther sanction to the authority of the 
council of Chalcedon, by putting us in mind of the opinion 
of Pope Gregory the Great, who is said to have held the 
four first general councils in equal veneration with the four 
gospels. And how comes all this to afford any peculiar force 
jof argument against the Scotch Episcopal church, which, if 
k esteems these two bishops of Rome, the first and best of 
their nances, as doctors of the church, and holds in all due 
veneration the four first general councijs, is yet entirely of 
the opinion of the church of England, as expressed in her 
21st article, that " general councils may err, and sometimes 
have erred, even in things pertaining unto God ?" With re- 
spect, however, to the present point in question, we do not 
see that it is at alj concerned with the regard which is due to 
the authority of general councils, and which must always be 
regulated by the consideration of the particular objects 
which their several canons had in view, according to the 
circumstances of the church at the different periods when 
these ecclesiastical synods were held. The council of 
Chalcedon was called for the express purpose of repressing 
the Eutychian heresy; and its sixth canon has been gene- 
rally thought to point at the danger of increasing that he- 
resy, by such irregular ordinations as might tend to give 
it additional support, and were therefore prohibited ; which 
prohibition was enforced by an imperial edict, evidently 
founded on the same reason, and published for the §agj?; 



^ 



282 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

purpos^e. Dr. Campbell has omitted to quote the intro- 
ductory part of the canon, in which the prohibition is par- 
ticularly levelled at " the loose ordination of presbyters 
and deacons^'* as most likely to continue the mischief which 
had arisen from the heresy that was now condemned : and 
he has also kept out of sight the conclusion of the canon 
which seems to prohibit the persons so ordained from 
performing the functions of their ministry, lest they should 
do it to the reproach or injury of the person who had or- 
dained them.* ' 

We could produce many respectable authorities in con«* 
firmation of the opinion which has now been given of the 
meaning and design of this Chalcedonian canon. The au- 
thor of that celebrated work called " Ecclesiastical Polity ^^ 
and who is generally distinguished by the title of the "judi- 
cious Hooker," argues very strongly against the error of 
those, who, " because the names of all church-officers are 
words of relation ; because a shepherd must have his flock^ 
a teacher his scholars, a minister his company which he 

* The whole canon runs thus in the original. M>i5'sva ^e aTroXEXy/AEvwj 
p;^«^oTov«gSat, ju»jT£ nPESBYTEPON, /x^ite AIAKONON, /x»te oAwj 
TivcJt Twv EV ixxKYicyio.'^iv.ta rayfjiOiTi^ H (j^yi tdtJcwf sv ExxX^icria woXsw? ■» HWjU,>if, 
n |w.apTi^ptwj ■» juovar»ipt<w o p^stpoTovajUEv^ sTriKvifvlloilo* Tag d£ ocTtoXvTug 
^Hforov^iJiivag ufio-sv \ ocytcx, avvoo^^ oc'KVfov £)(^hv rriv roiCK,vlriv ;^Eipo9£iTiav, 
KXi y,n^a,[ji^ ^vvoca-Qcci, svifx^v EO) 'YBPEI TOY XEIPOTONHSANTOS. 
It is thus translated by a German writer, of Lutheran principles.— 
*' Neminem absolute ordinari presbyterurti vel dia'-onum, vel quemlibet 
in ecclesiastica ordinatione constitutum, nisi nnaniteste in ecclesia civi- 
tatis, sive possessionis, aut in martyrio^ aut in monasterio, qui ordinatur, 
mereatur ordinationis publicatse vocabuluna. Eorum vero qui absolute or- 
dinantur, decrevit sancta synodus vacuara haberi manus impositionem, 
et nullum ejus tale factum valere, ad injuriam ipsius qui eum ordinavit." 
To which he adds this remark, •• Recte prohibet hie canon, ne quis, nisi 
in publico loco (qualia erant templa, pratoria, et sedificia martyribus con- 
secrata) ad ministerium ecclesiasticum ordinetur. Et apud nos hodie 
in ducatu Wurtenbergico, ordinationes fiunt in caetu ecciesiae." Vide 
Epitome Historiae Ecclesiasiicae. A Lucas Osiauder, D. D, 4to. Tu- 
binex, 159^7, p. 356. . • . , 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 283 

ministereth unto ; therefore suppose that no man should be 
ordained a minister but for some particular congregation, 
and unless he be tied to some certain parish. Perceive they 
not," says he, " how by this means they make it unlawful 
for the church to employ men at all in converting nations ? 
For if so be the church may not lawfully admit to an eccle- 
siastical function, unless it tie the party admitted unto some 
particular parish, then surely a thankless labour it is, 
whereby men seek the conversion of infidels, who know not 
Christ, and therefore cannot ht as yet divided into their 
special congregations and flocks." For the avoiding, there- 
fore, of all confusion in treating of this matter, he thinks 
there is nothing more material, than first — to separate 
" exactly the nature of the ministry from the use and ex- 
ercise thereof. Secondly, to know that the only true and 
proper act of ordination is to invest men with that power, 
which doth make them ministers, by consecrating their per- 
sons to God and his service, in holy things, during the term 
of life, whether they exercise that power or no. Thirdly, 
that to give them a title or charge where to use their minis- 
try, concerneth not the making, but the placing of God's 
ministers ; therefore the laws, which concern only their 
election or admission to that place or charge, are not appli- 
cable to infringe, in any way, their ordination. And, fourth- 
ly, that as oft as any ancient constitution, law, or canon is 
alleged concerning either ordinations or elections, we forget 
not to examine, whether the present case be the same which 
the ancient was, or else do contain some just reason, for 
which it cannot admit altogether the same rules, which for- 
mer affairs of the church, now altered, did then require." 

Having laid down these premises, and shown the neces- 
sity of attending properly to them, in all questions relating 
to the ordination and appointment of the Christian minis- 
try, this learned writer draws such a conclusion from them, 
as affords a sufficient defence of the Scotch Episcopal ordi- 
nations against any misapplication of that canon of the 



2$i4f Particular Defence of the episcopacy of Scotland, 

touncil of Chalcedon, which is now under our considera* 
tion : ** Absolutely therefore," says he, " it is not true, that 
any ancient canon of the church, which is, or ought to be 
with us in force, doth make ordinations at large unlawful ; 
arid as the state of the church doth stand, they are most 
necessary. If there be any conscience in men, touching 
that which they write or speak, let theni consider as well 
what the present condition of all things doth now suffer, 
as what the ordinances of former ages did appoint ; as weU 
the weight of those causes, for which our affairs have 
altered, as the reasons, in regard whereof, our fathers and 
predecessors did sometime strictly and severely keep that 
which for us to observe now, is neither meet, n6r always 
possible."* 

To the same purpose, we find another no less v'enerable 
author, the pious Bishop Jeremy Taylor, when mentioning 
this very decree of the council of Chalcedon, making a dis- 
tinction between those ordinations which, for particular rea- 
sons of prudence or expediency, were declared to be un- 
canonical and irregular, and those which were always held 
to be null and void in their own nature^f Of the latter kind 
was every ordination, which was not sanctioned by proper 
Episcopal authority in the ordainer ; whereas the former 
were prohibited merely for the sake of order and regularity, 
after it was found expedient to allot a certain portion of the 
church to the inspection of every particular bishop, assisted 
in certain parts of his pastoral office by the subordinate 
clergy of his own di&trict. But this restriction to a pecu- 
liar charge was not founded in any thing essential to the 
nature of the Christian priesthood : It arose entirely from 
local circumstances, and was marked by such limits of con- 
venience as were produced by a variety of causes operating^ 
differently in different countries, but all uniting in the pre- 

* See Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, book v. p. SZO, 332, 333. 
f See Bishop Taylor's Episcopacy Asserted, sect, xxxii. 



Particuhr Defence of the £piscopacy of Scotland. ^^^ 

servation of what St. Cyprian called the " one Episcopate'* 
of divine appointment, parcelled out by ecclesiastical autho- 
tity and consent, into such parts and portions as might be 
severally held by their respective bishops, for conjunctly 
promoting the common cause of their great Lord and Mas* 
ter, the Shepherd and Bishop of souls. 

" Here, then,'* as Dr. Potter,* another eminent divine, 
expresses himself on this subject, " we must carefully dis- 
tinguish between the ordination of ministers, and their de* 
signation to particular districts. For these are things wholly 
different, though they often went together ; it being mani- 
fest, that One may be a bishops or priest, where he has no 
authority to exercise his office ; which is the case not only 
of those who are ordained to convert heathens, without any 
title to a particular church j but all others who travel be-* 
yond the limits of their own district: For a priest who 
eomes into a foreign country, where other lawful ministers 
are settled. Still retains his sacerdotal character, and yet 
has no authority to take upon him the ordinary exercise of 
his office there." 

All this, indeed, is in perfect conformity to that part of 
the established doctrine of the church of England which is 
laid down in her ordination offices, as fully expressive of 
her sentiments on the point now before us. Thus in the 
*' ordering of priests," the candidate " receives the Holy 
Ghost, for the office and work of a priest in the church of 
God, committed unto him by the imposition of hands ;" 
and on receiving the bible from the bishop, he gets " au- 
thority to preach the word of God, and to minister the 
holy sacraments in the congregation, where he shall be 
lawfully appointed thereunto." So likewise in the " conse- 
cration of bishops," when the presiding bishop has said — 
" Receive the Holy Ghost, for the office and work of a 
bishop in the church of God, now committed unto thee, 

* See his Discowse on Church Goi'crnmtnt, p. 452. 



286 Particular Defence of the Episcopticy of Scotland, 

by the imposition of our hands, in the name of the Father, 
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Amen ;"— He 
immediately adds — " And remember that thou stir up the 
grace of God, which is given thee, by this imposition of 
our hands ;" where the admonition plainly alludes to the 
p^a^to-jua Ccharisma) the gift or grace, which was given to 
Timothy by the same means, and points out both the na- 
ture and design of it. But not a word is said in all this 
solemn act of immediate " ordination, by laying on of 
hands," that has the least appearance of connecting it with, 
or making it depend upon, what Dr. Campbell insists, is 
absolutely essential, " the solemn assignment of the per- 
sons ordained, to a particular charge." Yet this " form of 
consecrating bishops, which is according to the order of 
the church of England," is the very form by which those 
bishops were consecrated, from whom the present Scotch 
Episcopal clergy derive their orders, and who, in Dr. Camp- 
bell's estimation, " surprising" as the discovery may seem, 
were no other than " bishops merely nominal^'' that is, as- 
suming the name, but possessing none of the power or au- 
thority peculiar to bishops. 

Let us, then, examine a little more particularly how this 
matter stands, and consider the peculiar situation of the 
bishops who were ejected at the revolution, and of those 
who were their immediate successors in the Episcopal of- 
fice, together with the motives which influenced their con- 
duct in providing for that succession i From all this it will 
appear what a strange misrepresentation Dr. Campbell has 
given of the whole affair, as unworthy of his character, as 
it is unjust to those whom he has thus endeavoured, but, 
we hope, vainly endeavoured, to expose in the most ridi- 
culous and contemptible light. That the prelates of Scot- 
land, before their legal ejection took place in consequence 
of the revolution, were true and lawful bishops^ in every 
sense which t. '^se terms can bear, he has not attempted 
to deny ; nor indeed has he deigned to take the least notice 



Parikular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 287 

of the cause or manner of their ejection, whence it pro- 
ceeded, or how it was conducted. The fact, however, is 
certain ; and the only point in question is, what these bi- 
shops became, after they were thus legally deprived of 
their sees, their revenues, and all kind of temporal juris- 
diction* We have already seen our Lecturer laying it 
down, as " a thing so plain, that one is almost ashamed to 
attempt to illustrate it, that as in fact a man ceases to be a 
husband the moment that he ceases to have a wife, and is 
no longer a shepherd than he has the care of sheep, so, in 
the only proper and original import of the words, a bishop 
continues a bishop only whilst he continues to have people 
under his spiritual care." Plain, however, as all this appears, 
we are at some loss to know what is here meant by a *' bi- 
shop's having people under his spiritual care .•" Not that 
there is any ambiguity in the words themselves, but be- 
cause we often find Dr. Campbell putting a very different 
sense on the powers and cares of bishops, from that, in 
which we think the church has always understood them. 
Yet we may surely take it for granted, from his own con- 
cession, that the ejected Scotch bishops oiwe had people 
under their spiritual care ; and this being acknowledged, 
we may also take the liberty of asking two simple questions, 
on which may be said to turn the main hinge of the argU'* 
ment between Dr. Campbell and us. One of these questions 
is — By what means were those bishops invested with this 
spiritual care ; or from what source did they derive their 
right to it? Our Professor could not say, what no true 
presbyterian, indeed no true Christian, will say, that they 
derived it from the state, which never pretended either to 
exercise or claim any power of " ministering either of 
God's word or sacraments," or of conveying any thing- 
whatever, which may truly be called spiritual. And if the 
case be really so, the next question is — Did the ejection of 
these bishops by the civil power deprive them of any 
)Jurely spiritual right, which they had possessed before, 



288 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 

and had been put in possession of, by ecclesiastical power 
only ? This question, we hope, will also be answered in 
/the negative ; or had there been any doubt about it in the 
minds of Dr. Campbell's pupils, they might have been re- 
ferred for a solution of it to a divine of the church of Eng- 
land, the learned Dr. Prideaux, author of the " Connec- 
tion of the Old and New Testament^'' which their Professor, 
in his first lecture, had called an " excellent work, and ear- 
nestly recommended to their perusal ;" and in which they 
would have found the following account of the Christian 
priesthood, as, in this respect, similar to the Jewish : 

" For to instance in Episcopacy, the first order of it, be^ 
sides the ecclesiastical office, which is derived fron) Christ 
alone, it hath in Christian states annexed to ic (as with us) 
the temporal benefice (that is, the revenues of the bishop» 
rick) and some branches of the temporal authority, as the 
probate of wills, causes of tithes, causes of defamation, &c» 
All which latter most certainly is held under the temporal 
state, but not the former. — -Were this distinction duly con- 
sidered, it would put an end to those Erastian notions which 
now so much prevail among us. For the want of this is the 
true cause, that many observing some branches of the Epis-p 
copal authority to be from the state, wrongfully from hence 
infer, that the rest is so too ; whereas, would they duly ex«- 
amine the matter, they would find, that besides the tempo-*' 
ral power and temporal revenues, with which bishops are 
invested, there is also an ecclesiastical or spiritual power, 
which is derived from none other than Christ alone. And 
the same distinction may also serve to quash another con- 
troversy, which was much agitated among us, in the reign 
of his late Majesty, King William the third, about the act 
which deprived the bishops, who would not take the oaths 
to that king. For the contest then was, that an act of Par^ 
liament could not deprive a bishop. This we acknowledge 
to be true in respect of the spiritual office, but not in re^ 
spect of the beijeficcj and other temporal advantages an4 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 289 

powers annexed thereto. For these every bishop receiveth 
from the state, and the state can again deprive any bishop 
of them on a just cause. And this was all that was done 
by the said act. For the bishops that were then deprived 
by it, had still their Episcopal office left entire to them ; 
they being as much bishops of the church universal after 
their deprivation, as they were before."*^ 

Such is the clear and distinct account which Dr. Pri- 
deaux gives of this matter ; and it should be remembered, 
that the case to which he alludes, of the deprived bishops 
in England, was of a much more perplexed and intricate 
nature, than that of their brethren in Scotland ; the former 
leading to an unhappy separation of one part of an Episco- 
pal church from another, whilst the latter was an overturn- 
ing of the whole established Episcopacy at once, and 
obliged the Scotch Episcopalians of that day to defend their 
cause, as it has been defended ever since, on those general 
principles, by which their ecclesiastic polity was supported 
in the first and purest ages of Christianity. This was the 
apology made for us in the year 1792, when that distin- 
guished prelate. Dr. Horsely, then bishop of St. David's, 
now of St. Asaph, stood up to plead our cause in the great 
council of the nation, with a strength of argument, and 
dignitv of mind, which did him equal honour as a bishop 
of the church, and a peer of the realm. " These Episco- 
palians," said his Lordship, " take a distinction, and it is 
a just distinction, between a purely spiritual, and a political 
Episcopacy. A political Episcopacy belongs to an esta- 
blished church, and has no existence out of an establish- 
ment. This sort of Episcopacy was necessarily unknown 
in the world before the time of Constantine. But in all 
the preceding ages, there was a pure spiritual Episcopacy, 
an order of men set apurt to inspect and manage the spi- 
ritual affairs of the church, as a society in itself totally un- 

* Connection of the Old and A>zy Testament, part ii. book 3, p. 16L 






290 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland 

connected with civil government. Now, these Scotch 
Episcopalians think, that when their church was cast off 
by the state at the revolution, their church, in this dis- 
carded, divided state, reverted to that which had been the 
condition of every church in Christendom, before the esta- 
blishment of Christianity in the Roman empire by Con- 
stantine the Great ; that losing all their political capacity, 
they retained, however, the authority of the pure spiritual 
Episcopacy within the church itself.-^That is the sort of 
Episcopacy to which they now pretend, and I, as a church- 
man, have some respect for that pretension."^ 

On these principles, therefore, founded in the very nature 
and constitution of the Christian church, we may safely say, 
that the bishops of Scotland, ejected at the revolution, con-* 
tinned to be as much bishops, in the pure ecclesiastical sense 
of the word, after, as they had been before their ejection ; 
and were so, even on Dr. Campbell's restricting plan, when 
supported by all his allusions to father and husband, sove- 
reign and shepherd; since it is a certain fact, that, notwith- 
standing the parliamentary abolition of prelacy, great num- 
bers, both of clergy and laity, or, as the Doctor would rather 
have called them, presbyters and people, adhered to the 
deprived bishops, and acknowledged themselves to be still 
*^' under their spiritual care." And was this " spiritual care" 
of the Scotch church to cease entirely at the death of these 
bishops ? Or, because our Professor will not allow that the 
apostles could have successors, on account of the extraordi- 
nary powers with which these apostles were invested, was 
there any thing so peculiar in the character of bishops, 
precisely such as we have shown the bishops of the three 
first centuries to have been, that they could not have others 
to succeed them in their spiritual charge, or use the same 



* See a ]<Jarrative of the Proceedings relating to an act which was 
passed in 1.T2, for granting relief to pastors, ministers, and Jay persons 
of the Episcopal communion in Scotland. Printed at Aberdeen, 1792. 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 291 

means for preserving that succession, as had been used for 
the same purpose in every age and under every state or 
condition of the Christian church ? 

But, says our Lecturer, " even their own writers acknow- 
ledge, that immediately after the death of Dr. Ross, bishop 
of Edinburgh, the last of these ordained before the revolu- 
tion, there were no local bishops in Scotland, not one ap- 
pointed to any diocese, or having the inspection of any peo- 
ple, or spiritual jurisdiction over any district." And sup- 
posing this to have been the case, we shall be able to show 
how easily it may be accounted for, and what regular steps 
were taken for having again local bishops, appointed to their 
several dioceses or districts, as soon as circumstances 
would permit. — Even our adversary acknowledges, that 
at the period he mentions, " there were bishops in Scot- 
land, who had been ordained at large, some by Bishop 
Ross, others by some of the Scotch bishops, who, after 
the revolution, had retired to England."*^ And from 
1f\rhat has been already said on the nature of ordination and 
Episcopal consecration, it is evident, that these were real, 
duly consecrated bishops, possessed of the power of con^ 
secrating others, and of taking the charge of any diocese 
or district that might be committed to their inspection. 

It is allowed, even by Dr. Campbell, " that those men 
who came under the hands of bishop Ross, had been regu- 
larly admitted ministers or presbyters in particular congre- 
gations before the revolution ;" and it is equally certain, 
that they had flocks, perhaps but " little flocks," yet not 

* This seems to bo very inaccurately stated, as none of the ejected 
bishops performed any consecration in England, and only one Scotch 
bishop was consecrated there, as may be seen in the Appendix No. I. 
from which it will also appear, that though Dr. Campbell speaks only 
of the bishop of Edinburgh as the ordainer, yet the first consecration ia 
Scotland after the revolution, was performed by the archbishop of Glas- 
gow, and bishop of Dunblane, in conjunction with the bishop of Edin- 
burgh ; and every consecration since has been performed by the canoni- 
cal number of hisliops. 



i292 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

despicable on that account, which still continued under 
their spiritual care, and according to our Professor's de- 
scription of the primitiv^e practice, " could assemble with 
their several pastors in one house, for the purpose of pub- 
lic worship :" And if it were true, as he says, that for 
many years after the introduction of Episcopacy into the 
church, a bishop's pastoral charge did not extend beyond a 
single congregation, then would it necessarily follow on his 
principles, that these Scotch pastors, when promoted to the 
Episcopal order by a solemn and regular consecration, be- 
came not only primitive bishops, but, in his opinion, perhaps 
the only primitive bishops, who were then to be found in 
Britain, or any other country. They were certainly " paro- 
chial bishops," even in Dr. Campbell's view of their charac- 
ter ; and we know not what good reason he could have as- 
signed, why their parochial charge, however small, might not 
have been called their diocese, or might not have swelled to 
such an extent, by the addition of neighbouring congrega- 
tions, as to become a diocese, even in the modem sense oi 
the word. It is of no consequence, that an unprecedented 
scheme was afterwards set on foot, for committing the 
whole government of the Scotch Episcopal church to a col- 
lege of bishops, who were to act in common, without any 
of them being appointed to the charge of a particular dis- 
trict: And it is now as little worthy of notice, that in op- 
position to such a fanciful system of ecclesiastic polity, the 
defenders of diocesan Episcopacy thought proper to distin- 
guish the members of this college by the title of " Utopian 
bishops." All that we have occasion to observe respecting 
a controversy, which was soon brought to an end, is merely 
this, and it must have been well known to Dr. Campbell, 
that none of the writers from whom he borrowed the de- 
nomination, which he has so derisively applied, ever ex- 
pressed the least doubt of the college bishops, as they were 
called, having been duly and regularly consecrated, and 
thereby invested with full powers for conveying to othei> 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 29S 

the same gift or grace which themselves had received by 
imposition of hands, for the purpose of preserving, through 
that dangerous and distressful period, a regular Episcopal 
succession in the church to which they belonged. 

This indeed appears to have been the principal design of 
all the consecrations which took place in Scotland from the 
revolution, in 1688, to the death of the last survivor of the 
ejected bishops, which happened in 1720. It was not till 
the number of these prelates was reduced to five, and some 
of these also advanced in years, that they saw the necessity 
of making some provision for continuing the Episcopal 
succession, and thereby preserving their national church 
from being again obliged, as she had been within their 
own memory, to have recourse to another quarter for a 
regular and valid Episcopacy. — Something of this kind is 
always alluded to, in the deeds or instruments of their 
consecration, signed and sealed in the usual manner:* 
And after the first consecration was performed by the arch- 
bishop of Glasgow, and other two of the deprived prelates, 
we find on every subsequent solemnity of the same kind, 
some of the new bishops assisting the old, as long as any 
of them remained, and afterwards acting in their own 
names, and by their own powers, as prudence or necessity 
dictated. At the same time, many considerations might 
present themselves to show the propriety of what was pro- 
posed, and cordially agreed to on both sides ; that during 
the life of any of the old bishops, the government of the 
church should remain entirely in their hands, whilst those 
whom they had consecrated should, all that time, be vested 
with no diocesan power, nor have the inspection of any 
particular district, but merely assist the others in keeping 
up the Episcopal order, and managing matters for the ge- 
neral good of the church. 

Such was the plan of procedure suggested by the ne- 

* See copies of them in the Appendix, No. II. 



^94 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

cessity of the times, and recommended, no doubt, by va- 
rious circumstances, as most likely to answer the purpose 
for which it was adopted. — And however unsuitable and 
improper it may now appear to us, before we can form any 
just or candid judgment of the motives which gave rise to 
it, we shall find it necessary to look back a little to the state 
of things at that period, and consider what might be the 
sentiments and feelings of the bishops and clergy of the 
lately established church, whom the revolution had de- 
prived of their livings and many valuable privileges, had 
reduced to the most abject poverty and pitiable distress, 
and thereby thrown into a state of dependence on the hopes 
of that family, for the support of whose interests they had 
suffered this deprivation, and all these accumulated hard- 
ships. It is painful, even at this distance of time, to reflect 
on the violent and barbarous manner, in which these un^ 
happy sufferers were driven from their former possessionsi^ 
The remembrance of such strange and unexpected seventy 
was not likely to be soon effaced, and some of the political 
measures of those times were but ill adapted to conciliate 
the minds of persons, who had so much cause, as they 
thought, for being disaffected to the established govern- 
ment. Hence it was that the shattered remains of the old 
national church came to be considered as a society kept 
together for no other purpose than to s^r\'^e the interests, 
and support the pretensions of the exiled family. On some 
of the principal friends of that family, many of the perse- 
cuted clergy had been obliged to depend for protection and 
support, and, in consequence of that dependence, had been 
much influenced by the wishes and opinions of their pa- 
trons. It may also be supposed, that some of them would 
retain as much of the prevailing opinion, respecting the ne- 
cessary connection between the mitre and the crown, as 
might lead them to suppose, that the church could not pos- 
sibly subsist, without admitting the same interposition of 
regal authority in the nomination of its bishops, to which 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 295 

they had been accustomed in the times of constitutional 
and legal Episcopacy. 

Viewing things in this light, and encourged, perhaps 
obliged to take such measures as were most agreeable to 
those persons of rank and influence on whom they de- 
pended, a part, though but an inconsiderable part of the 
Scotch Episcopal clergy, contrived a new scheme for ma- 
naging the government of their church, till it should be 
seen whether there was any probability, as they, perhaps, 
might be led to hope, from their remembrance of what 
had formerly happened, of recovering her ancient privi- 
leges. The plan proposed, of which we have already taken 
some notice, was shortly this ; — that after the death of the 
bishop of Edinburgh (who, as we have seen, survived the 
other ejected prelates till the year 1720) all the bishops who 
had been consecrated since the revolution, and were then 
alive, should be formed into an Episcopal college^ for the 
general purpose of preserving a succession of bishops, and 
ordaining inferior clergy, but without pretending to local 
jurisdiction, or the charge of any particular district, which, 
as they could not obtain with the formal sanction of govern- 
ment, they thought it better to decline, out of respect to 
the suffering situation of the person, whom they acknow- 
ledged as their king. The scheme accordingly was no 
sooner proposed, than it received his approbation, and on 
this plan a few promotions soon after took place, in conse- 
quence of recommendations from the exiled prince. But 
notwithstanding this shadow of support to the collegiate 
scheme of church government, and however proper or re- 
spectful to the unfortunate house of Stuart, it might have 
appeared in the eyes of a few individuals, it was far from 
being acceptable to the clergy in general, or giving any satis- 
faction to the great body of the laity who adhered to the 
communion of the Scotch Episcopal church. They longed 
for the revival of diocesan Episcopacy, as that form of 
church government, to which they had always been accus- 



296 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 

toned, and which they knew to be most conformable to 
the primitive model. They saw no necessity for con- 
founding the things of God with the things of Caesar ; and 
since it was an undoubted fact, that the adventitious privi- 
leges granted by the state, had laid the foundation of the 
grateful concessions made by the Christian church, they 
considered that part of it, to which they belonged, being 
now destitute of all secular support or encouragement from 
the state, as at full liberty to betake itself to its own intrin- 
sic powers, and make what provision was necessary for the 
succession and continuance of its sacred orders. There 
could be no occasion for asking a licence from the crown 
for the election of bishops, who were not to be distin- 
guished by any mark of the royal favour, nor to enjoy any 
peculiar benefit for the support of their profession. They 
might surely be promoted now, as they had been of old, 
before Christianity became a religion established by law : 
And where no interposition of royal authority, no inter- 
ference of the state was to be expected, as the church was 
left at liberty to exercise those powers communicated by 
her divine founder for preserving her in existence ; so, whilst 
this was done in a quiet and becoming manner, there was 
no reason to fear that government would be offended. ' 

These were the principles on which the constitution of 
our church was settled, as soon as it recovered from the 
shock, which was necessarily occasioned by the violent and 
abrupt termination of its connection with the state. And 
if some of our writers, whom Dr. Campbell calls the 
" warmest partizans of our sect, have not scrupled to own, 
that at the death of the bishop of Edinburgh in 1720, all 
the dioceses in Scotland were become vacant," — ^}'et it can 
never be supposed, that these writers believed the whole 
Episcopal church in Scotland to have become so far vacant 
likewise, as to have no bishops in it capable of being elected 
to take the charge of its several districts, or of consecrat- 
ing others, that might be elected for that purpose. — This 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 297' 

was a sort of vacancy, which none of our writers ever did, 
or could acknowledge ; because they all knew well, that 
when that event happened, which occasioned this " dioce-F 
san vacancy," there were no fewer than six of those bi- 
shops alive, who had been consecrated since the revolu- 
tion, and whom they always owned to be real bishops^ in 
the true and primitive sense of the word. And they knew 
likewise, that in less than two months after the death of the 
bishop of Edinburgh, the presbyters of that diocese, which 
had once been legally and constitutionally under his inspec- 
tion, unanimously elected one of the above-mentioned six 
bishops to be their diocesan ; and not long after, the pres- 
byters of Angus elected another of them, and those of 
Aberdeen a third,^ for the same Episcopal charge of these 
several districts. It can hardly be supposed, that all these 
presbyters, who had been bred for the ministry, and regu- 
larly ordained in an Episcopal church, would be so unae-f 
quainted with ecclesiastical history, and the canons of an- 
cient councils, as to make choice of persons for their bi- 
shops, who by being ordained at large, might have assumed 
the nanie, but had no just right to the character of bishops, 
and to whose first ordination as presbyters, " their farcical 
consecration," as Dr. Campbell thought proper to call it, 
'* by Doctor Ross and others, added nothing at all." Is it 
to be imagined, that so many respectable and experienced 
clergymen would have joined in countenancing and abet- 
ting such a ridiculous, we may say even impious farce j or 
have suffered the government of their church, and the 
management of its affairs, to fall into the hands of persons 
who had obtained their promotion by such irregular and 
unjustifiable means? Yet no remonstrance appeared against 
it ; nothing indeed was seen but a general approbation of the 
measure which had thus restored the true diocesan Epis^ 

• See Skinner's Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 628, 629, 

38 



298 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

copacy ; and a few years after, the whole Episcopal church 
in Scotland was settled on the same right and orderly plan, 
and certain regulations adopted, which have continued to 
be the standard of its discipline to this day.^ 

We have been obliged ta be thus particular in our detail 
of facts, as the best way of repelling that strange, unex* 
pected attack, which has lately been made on the validity 
of our Episcopal orders, and which, we have seen, has 
nothing to support it, but the novelty of the arguments by 
which it is maintained, and the peremptory manner in 
which they are brought forward. If the refutation of theixl 
required any addition to that clear, satisfactory evidence, 
which has been already produced, we might easily fin4 it 
in the writings of some of the most learned and distin- 
guished divines of the Church of England, who have af- 
forded most abundant testimony in favour of such a sound 
and primitive Episcopacy, as that which still subsists in 
Scotland. And when this point came to be debated in the 
upper house of Parliament, and a discussion took place on 
the nature of our Episcopal succession as far back as the 
year 1748, the whole English bench unanimously opposed 
the passing of an act, which seemed to infringe the validity^ 
of our orders ; and some of them argued against it in the 
strongest terms, particularly the learned and pious Dr. 
Seeker, then bishop of Oxford, and afterwards archbishop 
of Canterbury, who, in his speech on that occasion, ob' 
served, that " to preserve the Episcopal church of Scotland, 
the bishops, who were auted of their temporalities at the 

* Agreeably to these regulations, every bishop is elected by the whok 
body of clergy, within the diocese or district over which he is to preside, 
and they meet for such election, in virtue of a mandate signed by at least 
u majority of the bishops. When the election is over, the issue of it 
is reported by the dean of the diocese to the primus, or senior bishop, 
who communicates it to his colleagues, and they jointly appoint a day 
and place for the consecration of the person elected, which is always 
performed by three bishops at least, in a public chapel, and according 
to the ordinal of the church of England. 



Particular Defence of the episcopacy of Scotland. 2S9 

involution, not only conferred orders, but consecrated bi- 
shops in the room of those that died ; for surely," said he, 
*' the Episcopal party in Scotland have as much a right and 
a power to both the one and the other, as the primitive 
Christians had, before their religion came to be the esta- 
blished religion in any country, and if they would profess 
and practise the same submission to the civil government, 
I should think them equally entitled to protection and indul- 
gence,"* 

Another more recent occurrence was the means of pro- 
curing a similar acknowledgment in favour of our Episco- 
pacy from that branch of the church of England which 
was long cherished in the British plantations of North- 
America, but could never obtain, till it was torn from the 
parent flock, that which would have given it additional life 
and vigour, a regular and resident Episcopate. In an excel- 
lent discourse on this subject, preached in Virginia, in the 
year 1771, the author makes this introductory remark,— 
" It was (I believe) about the middle of the last century, 
that our want of bishops was sensibly felt and lamented, 
and that applications for remedying the evil were made 
to the throne. These applications were thought so reason- 
able, that under Charles the second, a patent was actually 
made out for appointing a bishop of Virginia. By some 
fatality or other (such as seems for ever to have pursued all 
the good measures of the monarchs of that unfortunate 
family) the patent was not signed when the king died ; and 
from that time to this, all exertions for the attainment of 
this desirable object, though they have never wholly ceased, 
have been as languid, as the opposition to them has been 
vehement. Never before in any period of our history, or 
in any part of the empire, was a measure so harmless, so 
necessary, and so salutary, resisted and defeated on grounds 
so frivolous, so unwise, and so unjust." Our author then 

* See the Scots Magazine for 1748, p. 589, 590. 



^00 Particular Defence df the Episcopacy ofScotlantL 

proceeds to mention, and answer very fully all the objec* 
tions, which had been made to this wise and salutary mea- 
sure ; and in an appendix which he subjoined to this dis-- 
course, when it was published with some others in the year 
1797, he concludes with these very just and pertinent ob- 
servations— 

" That the American opposition to Episcopacy was at all 
connected with that still more serious one, so soon after- 
wards set up against civil government, was not indeed 
generally apparent at the time, but it is now indisputable, 
as it also is, that the former contributed not a little to render 
the latter successful. The Anti-Episcopalians carried their 
point with an high hand, which is no otherwise to be ac- 
counted for, than that the party, in perfect union with their 
fellow labourers in the British parliament, were in the 
habit of opposing every measure that seemed likely to 
Strengthen the hands of government. That the object, 
which in this instance was opposed, was either in itself 
really dangerous, or intended to be so, will not now be 
pretended by any one : For hardly was the independence 
of the colonies gained, before an Episcopate was applied 
for and obtained ;"^ an Episcopate, in every respect simi* 
lar to that which had often and earnestly been requested 
by the English clergy in America ; that is, bishops duly 
authorized to perform the original duties of their office, to 
ordain and govern the clergy, and adtninister the sacred 
rite of confirmation, but without any temporal power or 
preferment, and possessed of no other authority than that 



• See " A View •o/' the Causes and Consequences of the American Revolu- 
tion, in thirteen Discourses, preached in North-America, between the 
years ir63 and 1775 — with an historical preface, by Jonathan Boucher, 
A. M. and F. A. S. — Vicar of Epsom in the county of Surry, London. 
1797" A work which does equal credit to its author, by the soundness 
of the principles which it inculcates, both in religion and politics, and by 
the manner in which they are enferced, from the authority of divine 
revdation. 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 301 

which is derived from the church and not from the state, 
being of a purely spiritual and ecclesiastical nature. 

This was the Episcopacy which was first communicated 
to the American church in the state of Connecticut, in the 
person of Dr. Samuel Seabury, one of the missionaries 
from the society for propagating the gospel in foreign parts ^ 
and a suffering loyalist during the American war, who 
having brought with him the most ample attestations of his 
character and qualifications, both from the clergy of Con- 
necticut, and those of the neighbouring state of New- York, 
was consecrated by the bishops in Scotland in the yeat 
1784, and some years after joined with, and assisted the 
bishops who received consecration at Lambeth, in giving a 
bishop to the protestant Episcopal church in the state of 
Maryland, and in other business that came before what is 
called the House of Bishops in America.^ This happy cO" 
alition, in forming and establishing the constitution of the 
church in the United American States, was justly consi- 
dered by those who had a hand in promoting it, as the best 
means of uniting them also in doctrine, discipline and wor- 
ship ; whilst it exhibits that becoming desire, and resolution 
to maintain a Christian fellowship and communion with 
the Episcopal church in this country, which must ever be 
regarded as a public acknowledgment on their part, of the 
validity of our orders, and the regularity of that Episcopal 
succession, from which they are derived. 

* This appears from a " Journal of the Proceedings of the Bishops^ 
Clergy^ and Laity of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States 
tf America, in a convention held in the city of New-Tork, in September ^ 
1792." In which journal it is mentioned, that Bishop Seabury preached 
by appointment, at the opening ©f the convention, and afterwards as- 
sisted Bishops Provoost, White, and Madison, in the consecration of Dr. 
Clagget, as bishop of the church in Maryland. " In 1793, Bishop 
Seabury published at New- York, two volumes of discourses, which are 
such as might have brought credit to any prelate, in any age, and in any 
country." He died in February, 1796, and for a character of him, sec 
Mr. Boucher's work, mentioned in the preceding note, p. 556, and also 
the obituary of the Gentleman's Magazsine for May, 1797, p. 442. 



302 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

On this point, therefore, we presume, it would be super- 
fluous to add any thing more to that abundant evidence, 
which has been already produced, and which, we would 
hope, must be considered as perfectly sufficient to show, 
how little ground Dr. Campbell had for making use of such 
a contemptuous and vilifying comparison, as that which he 
laid before his pupils, in the following passage of his 
eleventh lecture. " Let no true son of our church be 
offended, that I acknowledge our nonjurors to have a sort 
of Presbyterian ordination;" (alluding to what he had 
said just before, of the present Scotch Episcopal clergy 
having their ordination solely from, presbyters) " for I 
would by no means be understood as equalizing theirs 
to that which obtains with us. Whoever is ordained 
amongst us, is ordained a bishop by a class of bishops. 
It is true, wc neither assume the titles, nor enjoy the re- 
venues, of the dignified clergy, so denominated in other 
countries J but we are not the less bishops in eveiy thing 
essential, for being more conformable to the apostolic and 
primitive model, when every bishop had but one parish, 
one congregation, one church or place of common wor- 
ship, one altar or communion table, and was perhaps as 
poor as any of us. Whereas the ordination of our non- 
jurors proceeds from presbyters in their own (that is, in 
the worst) sense of the word, men to whom a part only of 
the ministerial powers was committed, and from whom 
particularly was withheld the right of transmitting orders 
to others. When we say that our orders are from presby?. 
ters, we do not use the term in their acceptation, but in 
that, wherein we find it used by Luke, in the Acts of the 
Apostles, by Paul in his epistles, and (if the name of 
fathers be thought to add any weight) by the purest and 
earliest fathers, Clemens Romanus, Polycarp, and others, 
presbyters, in short, whom the Holy Ghost has made bi- 
shops of the flock. But when we say, their orders are 
from presbyters, we use the word not in the apostolicjil, 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 303 

but in the more recent sense, for a sort of subordinate mi- 
nisters, who are not authorized to ordain, and who, on 
Dr. Hammond's hypothesis, as well as ours, were not ori- 
ginally in the church." 

On a calm, candid, and attentive perusal of the forego- 
ing passage, we can hardly refrain from asking even after 
the manner, which some perhaps will not think over-polite, 
of one of the reviewers of these lectures — ^' Is this the 
language and reasoning of Dr. Campbell, the justly cele- 
brated author of the Dissertation on Miracles^ and of the 
valuable work, entitled. The Philosophy of Rhetoric ? So 
says the editor, and we dare not contradict him ; but it 
is such reasoning as would disgrace a school-boy who had 
ever looked into a treatise of logic."^ Let us examine it 
a little, with all the impartiality which can be expected 
from persons, whose right to the true clerical character is 
held forth by it in, what must appear to them, the most 
pitiful and degrading light. Had it even been acknowledged, 
that they had reaj genuine presbyterian ordination, per- 
haps they would not have thought themselves very highly 
complimented ; but to bring them down to something, di- 
minutively represented as only a sort of presbyterian or- 
dination, is truly humiliating, and would require much 
more strength of argument than Dr. Campbell has thought 
fit to produce for effecting such a bold depression of our 
Episcopal orders. Endeavouring to show the superior au- 
thority of the orders of presbyterians, he indeed affirms, 
but affirmation is not proof, " that whoever is ordained 
amongst them, is ordained a bishop by a class of bishops." 
If then there be any regard due to succession at all, may it 
not be asked, what class of bishops ordained bishop Calvin 
at Geneva, or bishop Knox in Scotland? The former, as far 
as appears from his history, never had ordination of any kind, 
though few bishops ever assumed more of the Episcopal 

* See Anti-Jacobin JRevleiv for July, 1801, p. 245, 



304 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

power than he did ; and the latter, if he received any or- 
ders at all, which seems to be very uncertain, yet could only 
have been ordained a presbyter, or one of those to whom, 
even by our Professor's own account " a part only of the 
ministerial powers was committed, and from whom was 
particularly withheld the right of transmitting orders to 
others." How then could he or any of the class of pres- 
byters at the reformation, take upon them to transmit to 
others what themselves had not received ; or pretend to ex- 
ercise a right, which had been always, by divine institu- 
tion, withheld from the office to which they had been ap^ 
pointed ? 

Were it however to be granted, in contradiction to the 
clearest evidence of scripture and antiquity, that bishops 
and presbyters being originally of the same order, no dis- 
tinction ought ever to have been made between them, nor 
any exclusive powers assigned to the one, more than to the 
other J yet, as Dr. Campbell allows, that " those men, who 
came under the hands of Bishop Ross, had been regularly 
admitted ministers or presbyters^ before the revolution, 
and that the orders of the present Scotch Episcopal clergy 
are derived from these presbyters," we may submit to the 
judgment of any unprejudiced person, whether the ordi-^ 
nation of those clergy be not in every respect as valid as 
that of any other body of men who derive their orders only 
from presbyters, and much more so than that which can be 
traced to no source of ecclesiastical power at all, but owes 
its origin solely to the appointment of the people, or the au- 
thority of the civil magistrate. In a case so plain, and 
where the premises are so clear, it might have been 
thought, that the conclusion would be equally obvious, and 
that no " true son" of a presbyterian church, would ever 
have objected to any sort of, what is really, presbyterian 
ordination, or made any difference between the powers of 
those presbyters, who were surely all alike subordinate 
ministers as well before, as at the time of the reformation^ 



Particular Defence qfthe Episcopacy of Scotland, 305 

and who could not since have acquired a right to change 
die inherent nature of their powers, or to make themselves 
a different order from what they were originaliv intended 
to be. Yet Dr. Campbeil has found out a distinction be- 
tween our acceptation of the word *' presbyters,'' which he 
<:alls not onlv a *'' more recent," but the " worst sense" of 
it, and the .*' apostolical," which is no doubt the best sense 
in which he uses it ; as if the difference between his sense 
of the word and ours could make any difference in the 
nature of the office, or render it better to him and worse 
to us, according to the sense in which it is taken. This 
seems to be just the same as adopting the popular argu- 
ment of the Romish doctors in recommending their tran* 
substantiation, '^ crede quod habes, et babes," believe that 
you have, and you have it, jL.et a man but believe, that 
he possesses any office, or that the office which he possesses 
has particular powers assigned tp it, and nothing more is 
necessary to put him in possession either of the one or the 
other. The absurdity here is the same, as if a subaltern in 
the army should take the command of a regiment, because 
he believes himself to be as much an officer as his colonel^ 
©r a justice of die peace assume the powers of the Lord 
High Chancellor, because they are both judges. 

When Dr. Campbell presumed that his orders were better 
than those of the Scotch Episcopal clergy, because theirs 
were only from prest)yters, as " a sort of subordinate mi- 
nisters who are not authorized to ordain," whereas his 
were froni " presbyters in the acceptation used by Luke^ 
by Paul, by Clemens JRomanus, Polycarp, and others of 
the purest and earliest fathers j presbyters, in short, whom, 
the Holy Ghost had made bishops of the flock ^"* all this 
jamounts to nothing more than bare, bold presumption, 
without the least appearance of proof. He could not but 
Jknow, that we never pretended to deny the power of the 

*• Lecture x\, 
39 



'306 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland 

Holy Ghost to make bishops of the flock, not only of pres* 
byters, but even of deacons and laymen too, if he was 
pleased so to do. This, however, we are sure, was never 
done in the ordinary way, but by a more certain and evi* 
dent mode of appointment than any inward '' conscious^ 
tiess," or mere effect of fancy, which yet appears to be all 
that our Professor had to support him, when he thus at- 
tacked the pious and learned Dodwell.^ — " I have stronger 
evidence that you have no mission, than all your traditions, 
and antiquities, and catalogues will ever be able to sur- 
jnount." And what is this evidence, which must be strong 
indeed, to set aside all these means of ascertaining a divine 
mission, which have been so long and generally received ? 
We have all that is brought forward against them in what 
immediately follov/s— ^" For if he, whom God sendeth^ 
speaketh the words of God, (and this is a test which Christ 
himself hath given us) he who contradicteth God's words 
is not sent by him." And by this rule it is, that all the* 
pretenders to " mission," even the wildest of our modern 
missionaries, endeavour to justify their pretensions on the 
ground of their " speaking the words of God," of which 
they, no doubt, think themselves the best judges. On this 
ground, too, our learned Professor might have saved him- 
self a great deal of the trouble he took in seeking for other 
arguments to run down the orders of the Scotch Episcopal 
clergy, since all he had to do was barely to affirm, that they 
^' contradict God's words,"— ^therefore, they have no mis- 
sion. It was likewise quite unnecessary, in arguing against 
the pretensions of these clergy, that he should take any pe- 
culiar merit to himself and his brethren, on account of their 
" not assuming the titles nor enjoying the revenues of the 
dignified clergy, so denominated in other countries, al- 
though they are not the less bishops in every thing essen- 
tial, for being more conformable to the apostolical and pri- 

* Lecture iv. 



Partkuhf Defence of the Episcopacy 6f Scotland. 307 

mltive model j" since he knew very well that the Scotch' 
Episcopal clergy were as destitute of titles or revenues as' 
he could pretend to be ; and however he might have wished 
to sneer at the " dignified clergy in other countries," yet 
when he condescended to compare his own church with 
" our sect," the only question was, which of these two was 
most " conformable to the apostolical and primitive mo- 
del." It is by this conformity that we think ourselves at 
present peculiarly distinguished, in all the instances of unity 
which he has mentioned, as they were understood in the 
language, and explained by the practice of the truly apos- 
tolical church. And if his comparative " poverty" be any 
just mark of " conformity to the primitive model," it will 
not be easy to deny the preference in this respect to the pre- 
sent Scotch Episcopal church, of whose ministers it may 
not improperly be said, in the language of an apostle, that 
they are " as poor, yet making many rich, as having no- 
thing" that can be called temporal, and settled revenue, 
*' yet possessing all things" that pertain to spiritual or 
Christian edification.* 

But there is still something farther to be said in sup- 
port of the validity of the Scotch Episcopal orders, when 
thus drawn into a comparison with that sort of presbyterian 
ordination, which obtains under the establishment of this 



* It cannot be thought impertinent to mention here an anecdote recorded 
in the life of that truly "dignified clergyman," the late Dr. Home, bishop 
of Norwich, who, his biographer says — " from the present circumstances 
of its primitive orthodoxy, piety, poverty, and depressed state, had 
such an opinion of the Scotch Episcopal Church, as to think, that if the 
great apostle of the Gentiles were upon earth, and it were put to his 
choice with what denomination of Christians he would communicate, the 
preference would probably be given to the Episcopalians of Scotland, as 
most like to the people he had been used to." See life of Dr. Home, in 
Mr. Jones* Works, vol. xii p. 176. It can give no offence, we hope, 
thus to state a President of Magdalen College in Oxford, over against 
a Principal of Marischal College in Aberdeen, as at least equally com- 
petent to judge in matters of apostolical conformity. 



S6S Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 

country, where every one that is ordained by the esta* 
blished rules, Dn Campbell says, *^ is ordained a bishop 
by a class of bishops," He had also before laid it down 
as an invariable maxim, that the name bishops which 
nieans overseer^ cannot with any propriety be applied to 
any person, who has nothing to overilee, and, therefore, 
*' a bishop continues a bishop only whilst he continues 
to have people under his spiritual care.'" Dr. Campbell, 
then, having been ordained a bishop, or what was the 
same with him, a minister, could only continue to be so, 
whilst he had people under his ministry or spiritual care* 
Yet we are told by his biographer, that in June, 1795, 
finding himself^ no doubt, as his letter expresses it—" pro- 
videntially in a situation of livitig independently of the 
emoluments of office," he resigned his charge of minister 
(if Grey-friars' church, as well as that of Professor of Di- 
%'inity in Marischai College, into the hands of the presby- 
tery of Aberdeen, "" entreating them to declare him re* 
leased in future from these functions, and the pastoral re- 
lation implied in them loosed ;" with a caution^ however, 
against any misconstruction of his meaning expressed in 
these words—" I hope I shall not be misunderstood by 
any to mean, by this deed, a resignation of the character 
of a minister of the gospel, and servant of Christ^ In 
this character I glory, so far am I from intending to re- 
sign it but with my breath ; nor do I mean to retain it only 
as a title. For if, by the blessing of God, I should yet be 
able to do any real service, either in defence, or in illus- 
tration of the Christian cause^ I shall think it my honour, 
as well as my duty, and the highest gratification of which 
I am capable, to be so employed. It is only from the par- 
ticular relation to the people of Aberdeen as pastor^ and the 
theological students of Marischai College, as teacher, that 
it is my desire to be loosed.''''^ 

* See the Accemit of his Life and Writings prefixed to his Lectures. 



i( 



PaHkuhr Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 30S 

The reader perhaps will be a little surprized to find in 
this letter, some regard expressed for that very thing called 

character^'' in a minister of the gospel, which the same 
person, in his Lectures, has treated with so much pointed 
scorn and disrespect. But what we are chiefly concerned 
to lay hold of, is the very appropriate weapon, which is 
here put into our hands, for defending the validity of our 
orders, against the only blow which Dr. Campbell could 
jfind the means of aiming at them. His peculiar attack on 
the Scotch Episcopal clergy, we have seen, is wholly sup- 
ported by his pretending, that they derive their orders from 
*' bishops merely nominal;" and that these bishops were 
thus " merelv nominal," because they received no particu- 
lar assignment to any Episcopal charge, for want of which 
he does not scruple to call their consecration farcical^ or 
of no signification. Had he been now alive, we should 
certainly have wished to ask him, what material difference 
there is, between a man's retaining the title after resigning 
the charge, and accepting of the title at first without the 
charge ? We see him announcing himself to be a bishop 
Or pastor, ordained by a class of the same kind, and by 
that very ordination, assigned and bound to a particular 
pastoral charge, without which, by his own account, he can 
no longer continue to be a bishop, pastor^ or minister ; yet 
from that charge he desires to be released, and to have his 
pastoral relation to it loosed, but still means to retain his 
character as a minister of the gospel, and is willing " to be 
employed either in defending or illustrating the Christian 
cause, as far as he is able," which can only mean his doing 
it, as a minister, bishop or pastor. And what is all this 
but intending to act as a bishop ordained at large ; to be a 
pastor without a flock, a minister without having any peo- 
ple under his ministerial or spiritual care, and to continue 
a bishop, even when he had no charge to oversee or in- 
spect I If then in this assumed character, he had pre- 
tended to baptize a child, or administer the sacrament of 



310 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 

the Lord's supper, or assist a class of bishops in ordaining^ 
a bishop, must not every thing of this kind, on his own prin- 
ciples, have been no better than a farcical ceremony, per- 
formed by one who had no power or right to perfoi-m any 
such office, being in fact, no other than a bishop, pastor or 
minister ^^ merely nominal?'*'* But as Dr. Campbell, no 
doubt, would have spurned at the idea of acting in such a 
fictitious character, why was he so ready, without just 
ground, to apply the same censure to others, and to hold up 
to contempt, as bishops " merely nominal," those who had 
surely as good a right to be esteemed real and true bishops, 
as he had, even by his own way of arguing, to be consi- 
tiered as a minister of the gospel, after he had resigned his 
pastoral charge, and so renounced the only title he could 
have, by his own principles, to that official character? — If 
he wished to retain such a character only on the supposi- 
tion of his still " being able to do some service either in 
defence, or in illustration of the Christian cause," the same 
privilege might have been allowed to those whom he thought 
proper to call " nominal bishops," many of whom well could, 
and some of them actually did defend and illustrate what 
they believed to be the Christian cause, and on that foot- 
ing, might certainly claim, as well as Dr. Campbell, to be- 
considered as, what they really were, bishops of the Chris- 
tian church. We oiFer this reasoning merely in return to- 
the Doctor's " argumentum ad hominem," and to show 
how much his practice, in the affair of his resignation, 
" militated against his principles." If he was at so much 
pains to condemn us, as he thought, on our own principles, 
it is but fair that we should be allowed to make use of his 
principles, as far as we can, in our own vindication. 

It is entirely for the purpose of vindicating ourselves, 
that wx have been so long detained, and obliged to make 
so many remarks, on the lecture now before us, which 
appears to have been wholly levelled at, what the Lecturer 



Fartkuhr Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 311 

i^alls^ " a pretty numerous class, and these not all Roman- 
ists :" By which description we may easily perceive, that 
he means the class whom he had, twice in this lecture, dis- 
tinguished by the obnoxious title of " our nonjurors^'' al- 
though in a former lecture he had candidly owned, " that 
we have none of that description at present." That some 
kind of reflection was intended by this appellation, may at 
least be suspected, from his always applying it as a mark 
of distinction, without any reference to the political senti- 
ments which gave rise to it, and particularly from the abuse 
which he pours out, with an unusual flow of acrimony, on 
a most learned and distinguished writer, whom he after- 
wards introduces to our notice, as " a zealous defender of 
prelacy," and what is worse, by the opprobrious designa- 
tion of" the Irish nonjuror^ Dodwell,"f distinguishing those 
who maintain that Episcopal ordination is necessary to the 
valid administration of the sacraments of our religion, by 
the title of " Dodwellians ;"{ as if this were a doctrine 
peculiar to nonjurors^ and therefore so zealously maintained 
by Dodwell. 

A similar intention is too obvious to escape notice in the 
treatment which our Lecturer bestows on another no less 

• Lecture xi. 

f Page 96 — 122. This great and good man had, no doubt, many sin- 
gularities of opinion, but none that could justify such abusive epithets as 
these — " Arrogant and vain man ! What are you, vi\xo so boldly and 
-avowedly presume to foist into God's covenant, articles of your own de- 
vising, neither expressed nor implied in his words? "Do yoic venture — a 
worm of the earth ? Can you think yourself warranted — for your own 
malignant purpose — to exhibit Christ, as the head of a faction — your 
party forsooth? — Your language is neither the language of scripture, nor 
of common sense." P. 90. It was the severity of this language of Dr. 
Campbell's, which provoked the Anti-yacobiji Revie-xver to make that bold 
and animated retort, which we meet with in his number for June, 1801, 
p. 112, and for which he makes a suitable apology, wishing rather to 
plead the cause of truth in the words of soberness. 

\ An epithet not peculiar to Dr. Campbell, as Mr. Anderson, of Dun« 
bai'ton, had niiide use of it long before. See his Defence, is^e, p. 9Q, 



.312 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

distinguished nonjuror^ the pious and learned Dr. Hi ekes, 
who had been dean of Worcester, and was deprived of 
that dignity, as the bishops of Scotland were ejected from 
their sees, in consequence of the revolution. The character 
of this celebrated divine had been severelv^ handled by our 
Professor in his tenth letter, on the subject of the resem- 
blance between the Jewish and Christian priesthood ; and 
here again, in the conclusion of the eleventh lecture, a 
heavy charge is brought forward against him in the follow- 
ing terms : — " An author of whose sentiments I took some 
notice in my last lecture, has observed,"^^ that as the civilians 
have their fictions in law, our theologists also have their 
fictions in divinity. It is but too true, that some of our 
theological systems are so stuffed with these, that little of 
plain truth is to be learned from them. And I think it will 
be doing no injury to this dogma of the character, to rank 
it among those fictions in divinity. God forbid I should 
add, in the not very decent words of that author, (though I 
really believe he meant no harm by them) which infnite 
wisdom and goodness have devised for our benefit and ad" 
vantage* The God of truth needs not the assistance of 
falsehood, nor is the cause of truth to be promoted by such 
means. The use of metaphorical expressions, or figurative 
representations, in scripture, give no propriety to such an 
application of a term so liable to abuse." — 'And we may too 
justly add, that there is hardly a term in scripture which is 
not liable to abuse, nay, which has not actually been abused 
by the depravity and perverseness of the human imagina- 
tion. The word fiction properly signifies something feigned 
or invented, for the purpose of conveying information, 
whether true or false. In leading to the discovery of truth, 
it is much the same as figure, or representation, and nothing, 
we know, is more common, than, in speaking of that mys- 
terious institution, to call the consecrated bread and cup in 

* Hickes' Christian Priesthood, lib. i. cap. ii. § 8. 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. SIS 

the eucharist, the representative symbols of the body and 
blood of Christ. Dr. Hickes was treating of the propriety 
of calling them so, because they are substituted and deputed 
for that bodv and blood, which they thus mystically repre- 
sent. " This power," says he, " in legislators, of making 
and supposing things to be to all intents and purposes, and 
tffects in law, what in reality they are not, is called by the 
civil law — fiction,'''' After which, he produces various in- 
stances of such fiction in the Roman law, and in the com- 
mon law of England, and then adds — " In like manner, 
therfe are fictions in divinity, which infinite wisdom and 
goodness have devised for our benefit and advantage. 
Thus man and wife are supposed to be, and therefore are 
made one fleshy as the law makes them one person. Thus 
Christ is supposed to be the Lamb slain from the founda- 
tion of the xvorld: Thus also the doctrine of adoption \% a 
div'ine fiction in the gospel, as it was an human fiction in the 
Roman law, and in both cases hath all the effects of real 
and legitimate sonship. And, therefore, I hope, it is no 
great or dangerous paradox to say, that by divine fiction or 
substitution^ the bread is made the bod)^, and the wine the 
blood of Christ," &c. And nothing surely can be more 
harmless than these observations, which need not to have 
occasioned so much horror and indignation, as seem to have 
been raised by them in the breast of our Lecturer. We 
may, therefore, justly enough observe, that " to have spoken 
with proper respect of men of such profound erudition, and 
distinguished excellence, as Dodxvell and Hickes^ however 
mistaken they might be, would certainly not have dimi- 
nished in the least Dr. Campbell's own reputation in the 
the world."* 

As this is the opinion of a clergyman of the church of 
England, as by law established under the present govern- 
ment, it cannot be supposed to proceed from any prejudice 

* See Mr. Daubeny's ei^ht Discourses on the Doctrine of Atonement, p. fS. 

40 



514 JParticular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

or partiality in favour of the political sentiments peculiar 
to nonjurors : And since Dr. Campbell's account of those 
whom he calls the " Scotch Episcopal party," and still re- 
presents as continuing in their nonjuring principles, seems 
to imply a suspicion that their original or transmitted disaf- 
fection to government may have been the cause of some 
defect or irregularity in the transmission of their clerical 
orders, we cannot do better than sum up what has been al- 
ready said on this subject, in the words of the same author 
whose opinion we have just now quoted, and who could 
not be influenced by any personal or interested motives to 
speak of the nonjuring clergy either of England, Ireland 
or Scotland, but as they really were, and showed them- 
selves to be both in their principles, and their conduct. 
Having occasion to mention some of these clergy, as zea- 
lous defenders of apostolic Episcopacy, such as Dodwell 
and Hickes^ Leslie^ and Law^ he argues in the following 
manner on the validity of their ministerial commission. 

* In a note subjoined to Bishop Horne's excellent Sermon on the 
Duty of contending for the Faith, preached at the primary visitation of th« 
present archbishop of Canterbury, in 1786 — we find the following cha- 
yacter of Mr. Leslie and his writings — •' The polemical skill of a Leslie 
is an expression of Bolinbroke. A clergyman's library should not be 
without this author's theological works, in two volumes, folio, containing 
his pieces against Deists, Jews, Romanists, Socinians, and Quakers. 
He is said to have brought more persons, from other persuasions, into the 
church of England, than any man ever did; his skill in conversation 
being equal to that in writing. Allowance must be made for a style> 
which, though sufficiently perspicuous and nervous, is not according to 
the modern ideas of correctness and elegance. Bayle styles him a man 
of great merit and learning. Mr. T, Salmon observes, that his works must 
transmit him to posterity, as a man thoroughly learned and truly pious. 
But a better and more disinterested judge, Mr. Harris, informs us, that 
he made several converts from popery, and says that notwithstanding his 
mistaken opinions about government, and a few other matters, he de- 
serves the highest praise for defending the Christian religion against De- 
ists, Jews, and Quakers, and for admirably well supporting the doctrines 
of the church of England against those of Rome. See Biqgtaphicai 
Dictionary.''* Bishop Home then adds — " Mr. Leslie's writings havfe 



Particular defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland^ 815 

^' When I consider, that among the nonjuring clergy, 
are to be found some of the most pious, most learned and 
most conscientious divines that ever adorned the church 
of England, I cannot help thinking, that the government 
would have gained more in honour, than it would have 
lost in security, had such men been permitted to have re« 
mained in possession of their preferments. But admit- 
ting, that policy demanded that the nonjuring clergy 
should be deprived, it is to be observed, that they were 
deprived only of those secuUar possessions, which the 
church had derived from her connection with the state. 
Their offence, if it may be called by so harsh a name, was 
of a political nature ; their punishment corresponded to it. 
They offended against the ruling powers ; they, in conse- 
quence lost their patronage. But all the rights, dignities 
and emoluments, which the priesthood derives from the 
piety and patronage of civil rulers, are quite distinct fromi 
that spiritual commission, by which the clergy administer 
the affairs of Christ's kingdom. Of this commission they 
could not be deprived by civil rulers, because it had been 
received from an higher authority. The office, therefore, 
which the nonjuring clergy held in the Christian church, 
was precisely the same, and every act of it as valid, ab- 
stractedly considered, after their deprivation, as it was be- 
fore ; what they had been deprived of, being only those 
contingent circumstances of emolument and honour, which 
have no necessary connection with the ministerial com- 
mission. The spiritual character of a bishop, and his par- 
ticular local jurisdiction, have been, at different times, and 
under different circumstances, separated from each other : 
But a man may still be a true bishop, whether he has or has 
not any particular district, over which he is authorized to 

been neglected, because he had the misfortune to be a nonjuror. But 
since the age is disposed to drop prejudices, it is a pity that this alone 
should be suffered to remain, especially as the subject of it is no1^' — ■ 
* rvaxed old and ready to vanish awav." 



MB Particular Defence of the Episcopacif of Scotland, 

preside. Such, in a theological sense, I conceive the nont- 
juring bishops were ; and 1 do not see how the testimony 
of such divines, upon the subject of church government^ 
can be affected by an offence committed against the civil 
power ; on the contrary, I should think such testimony 
ought to weigh heavy in the scale, from the consideration, 
that the parties who furnished it, (whatever judgment may 
be formed of their political opinions) had given the most 
unequivocal proof of their being honest men, bv sacrificing 
every temporal advantage to the preservation of their con- 
sciences."* 

" Such is the opinion giveli of the nonjuring clergy in ge- 
neral, by a writer who, as we before observed, cannot be 
supposed to feel any particular bias in favour of the cause, 
for which they were first distinguished by the title of nan-- 
jurors^ but seems to have a very just idea of their principles 
and conduct as ecclesiastics ; and that is now the only light 
in which we have any occasion to view their character or 
sentiments, all other objects of discussion being at last taken 
out of the way, and every question respecting their political 
attachments entirely laid to rest* Those, however, who have 
succeeded them in their ecclesiastical character, and have 
been the means of preserving a regular Episcopal succession 
in this country, are still, it seems, suspected of inheriting 
also some share of their disaffection to the established go- 
vernment ; which must have been the only reason that could 
have induced Dr. Campbell to keep up against them the 
odious title of nonjurors^ as a mark of their supposed dis- 
affection. As we have, therefore, sufficiently vindicated 
the conduct of our predecessors in handing down those 
spiritual powers, with which the present Scotch Episcopal 
clergy, according to the nature of their several orders, 
have been duly invested ; it is but fair that we be now al- 



* See an Appendix to the Guide to the Church, in answer to Sir Richard 
Hill, Bart. By the Rev. Charles Daubeny, L.L. B. London, 1799, 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 317 

lowed to speak for Ourselves, and humbly to request, that 
the following plain and honest representation of our case 
may be properly attended to, by all who have a right to be 
satisfied with respect to our loyalty as subjects, and espe- 
cially by those who, professing to hold the same religious 
principles as we do, are yet, it is said, kept back from join- 
ing our communion, by entertaining groundless suspicions 
against us, in regard to this very article. 

It has been already observed, that in consequence of the 
legal abolition of Episcopacy, which took place soon after 
the revolution in 1688, those who professed an adherence to 
the old ecclesiastical system were on that account suspected 
of still maintaining a spirit of disaffection to the new go- 
vernment. This is a fact which cannot be denied, and 
perhaps may be easily accounted for, from the natural ope- 
ration of those heavy penalties by which their worship was 
prohibited, or at least the public celebration of it severely 
restricted. Under these discouraging circumstances, which 
continued in full force for many years, it was hardly pos- 
sible for the Scotch Episcopalians to throw off the reproach 
of disloyalty which, in the opinion of the public at large, 
had been almost inseparably annexed to their religious pro- 
fession. All they could do, was to conduct themselves in 
such a quiet and inoffensive manner, as might convince go- 
vernment, that there was no danger to be apprehended from 
their principles, and therefore no necessity for with-holding 
from them any longer that lenity and indulgence which they 
have so liberally experienced ever since our present most 
gracious Sovereign came to the throne. The wisdom and 
clemency of his Majesty's government, so happily mani- 
fested from the commencement of his reign, encouraged 
them to hope, that an offer of their allegiance v/ould not be 
rejected: and as soon as they could make that offer in a 
conscientious manner, and consistently with the principles 
by v/hich, it was known, their conduct had been uniformly 
influenced, they had the satisfaction to find, from the King's 



318 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 

answer to their address, that it was graciously accepted; 
in consequence of which, they could not but hope, that the 
British legislature would take their case into consideration, 
and see the expediency of relieving both clergy and laity 
of the Episcopal communion in Scotland from the restraints 
and penalties to which they had been long exposed in the 
exercise of their religion. With this hope, an application 
was made to Parliament in their behalf; and in the act that 
was passed for their relief in the year 1792, one of the 
clauses of the preamble ran in these terms — " Whereas 
there is sufficient reason to believe that the pastors, minis- 
ters and laity of the Episcopal communion in Scotland, are 
now well attached to his Majesty's person, family and go- 
vernment." And if at that time the King and Parliament 
of Great- Britain had sufficient reason to believe, that we 
were such dutiful and loyal subjects, the subsequent period 
has affi^rded the most ample proof of our earnest desire to 
embrace every means in our power that might tend to con- 
firm that belief, and show us to be worthy of the good cha- 
racter which was then so honourably conferred upon us. 
The period we allude to has been disgracefully distin- 
guished by every possible art that could be devised for se- 
ducing subjects from their allegiance. None has ever sur- 
passed it in plots and associations, not for promoting the 
interests of this or the other candidate for the crown, and 
setting up one in preference to another, but for the express 
purpose of cutting off at once the pretensions of every 
claimant, extirpating the whole race of kings, subverting the 
foundation of all government, and bursting asunder not 
only the bonds of civilized society, but every religious tie 
that connects man with his God, and tends to secure his 
peace and happiness both here and hereafter. 

During all these wild and lawless attempts, which could 
have nothing for their object but the dissemination of anar- 
chy and confusion, and every evil work, no such base ima- 
gination could be laid to the charge of our society. Attach- 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 319 

ment to kingly power has been always the characteristic of 
the church to which we belong, and no one has ever been 
found connected with any seditious club, or democratic 
party, who dared to call himself a regular Scotch Episcopa- 
lian. Through the whole of that awful and arduous con- 
test, in which our country was lately^ engaged, whatever 
aid government could derive from the public solemnities of 
religion, was regularly afforded in our sacred assemblies : 
And on the days appointed by royal authority, either for 
national humiliation, or general thanksgiving, our people 
were always seen devoutly assembled in their several places 
of worship, using the various forms of prayer and praise^ 
which were composed for these solemnities, and may still 
be referred to as proofs of that appropriate mode of devo- 
tion with which they were celebrated. On all these occa- 
sions, the clergy of our communion did not fail to manifest 
an exemplary zeal in impressing on the minds of those un- 
der their charge, a just sense of their duty as good Chris- 
tians and as loyal subjects, exhorting them earnestly, in the 
words of inspired wisdom, to " fear the Lord and the 
king, and not to meddle with them that are given to change." 
To the king, as our rightful sovereign, and to his royal 
family, as pledges of a happy succession to his crown and 
dignity, we feel ourselves attached by all the ties of con- 
science, as well as gratitude, and have, therefore, uniformly 
promoted, to the utmost of our power, those salutary mea- 
sures of his government, which have, from time to time, 
been adopted for preserving the internal peace of the king- 
dom, as well as its security from every hostile invasion. 

For the truth of all this, we may appeal, and have ap- 
pealed to the testimony of those who frequent our places 
of public worship ; many of whom being placed in offices of 
trust under government, would give no countenance to our 
religious assemblies, if they did not find them such as are 

* This was written diiriBg the short continuance of the hte peace. 



320 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 

not only consistent with the laws, but worthy of protection; 
and were not perfectly sensible, that his Majesty has no 
better subjects, nor persons more attached to his govern- 
ment, on principles of permanent loyalty, than the bishops 
and clergy of the Scotch Episcopal church. May we not 
then be allowed to ask on what gi^ound it is, that we are still 
to be branded with the title of nonjurors^ as a mark of our 
supposed disaffection in refusing to swear allegiance to the 
sovereign upon the throne ; a supposition as unfounded, as 
it is meant to be unfavourable, and which can only proceed 
from a desire to keep up odious and unnecessary distinc- 
tions among his Majesty's subjects t Oaths may no doubt 
be contrived, and, in some instances have been required, 
both of a civil and religious nature, which we should think 
ourselves obliged to decline, as neither consistent with our 
principles, nor suited to our situation. But it is impossible 
that we could with any propriety, even on our present foot- 
ing of enjoying toleration only, refuse to swear allegiance 
to a sovereign, for whom we solemnly and sincerely pray, 
as often as we assemble in the house of prayer, that " God 
would be his defender and keeper, and give him the victory 
over all his enemies." With these, and such like petitions, 
put into our mouths by that excellent liturgy, which we ad- 
mire, and venerate, and daily use in our public service," it 
is wonderful that the Scotch Episcopal church should yet 
be suspected of any thing that looks like disaffection, or any 
jealousy be entertained of such an ecclesiastical body, even 
though dissenting from the establishment of Scotland, when 
by that very dissent, it is more closely united to the esta- 
blished church of England. Yet this bond of union, arising 
from a similarity of constitution, as far as regards the spi- 
ritual authority of the church, has been held up to derision, 
as a mere imaginar}^ privilege, and the *' Scotch Episcopal 
party J'' as Dr. Campbell has called it, is exposed to ridi- 
cule, for adhering to that form of ecclesiastical polity, which 
has the sanction of legal and constitutional support in the far 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 321 

greater, and most distinguished part of the British Empire. 
We need not then be ashamed of its being said, however 
we may object to the terms in which it is mentioned, that 
this adherence to the pohty of the primitive church " is 
made a principal foundation of dissent by a pretty numer- 
ous sect in this country." For though we have no right to 
value ourselves on our numbers, in proportion to the popu- 
lation of Scotland, and it is no part of our belief, that the 
truth must necessarily be on the side of the majority, yet 
we see no reason why the terms, sect and party ^ should be 
applied, as marks of reproach, to those whose religious de- 
nomination as Epi^Copaly is countenanced by that of the so- 
vereign on the throne, of the ^ Lords spiritual in parlia- 
ment assembled," and of much the largv^st proportion of 
the inhabitants of the united kingdom, when compared to 
those of any other religious persuasion. 

These considerations might be thought sufficient to se^ 
cure the Episcopacy of Scotland from the disgraceful im- 
putation of being allied to that sectarian spirit which de- 
lights in opposition to whatever is established, and is never 
satisfied, till every institution of superior dignity and merit 
be brought down to its own mean, debasing standard. 
This is not the doctrine by which we wish to be distin- 
guished ; nor ought we to be ranked among those modern 
authors of division, the founders of new sects, of whom 
Dr. Campbell observes — ^^ it is hard to conceive to what 
the disciples of some recent sectarians can be made prose- 
lytes, unless to uncharitabieness, hatred and calumny against 
their fellow Christians, and that on the most frivolous or 
Unintelligible pretexts." As we do not deal in '* hatred or 
calumny" against any human beings, so neither are the rea- 
sons " frivolous or unintelligible," for which we have con- 
tinued in a state of separation from the religious establish- 
ment of this part of our island : a separation foimded on 
tlie most substantial and important grounds ; such as have 
feeen long topics of serious discussion, and may be easily 

4i 



322 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 

understood by all who are desirous to inquire into them. 
We do not, therefore, consider ourselves as having any re- 
lation, or even resemblance to those " modern authors of 
division, who are daily introducing new sects in countries, 
where Christianity is universally professed, and where 
there is free access by the scriptures, both to its doctrine 
and to its precepts." Yet Dr. Campbell, who gives this 
account of them and their proceedings, might have known, 
that these " recent sectaries," e^s he calls them, and who 
are still abounding more and more i.i number and influence, 
are not slow to vindicate themselves on such pretences as 
these — " that the scripture, though in^all hands, is either 
abused or neglected ; that Christianity, though universally 
professed among us, is no more than a bare profession; 
that its doctrines are not properly understood, nor its 
precepts rightly applied ; and, therefore, they come with 
a charitable zeal, to rectify every abuse, to preach the true 
gospel in this unenlightened land, and open the eyes of a 
blind, deluded people." 

This has been the sectarian cry in all ages ; and how far 
it may be either checked or encouraged by some of the ar- 
guments made use of in these Lectures^ we shall not pre- 
tend to determine. That they have no particular tendency 
to repress the sectarian spirit, may indeed be justly inferred 
from the character given of them by one sufficiently ac- 
quainted with their whole end and object, and who tells us 
plainly, that the study recommended by them, " can give 
no offence to any, but to those who maintain the^w^ divinum 
(divine right) of bishops, and their hereditary succession 
from the apostles."^ — Indeed, the Lecturer himself makes 
a kind of apology even for those " contentious teachers," 
to whom he had been alluding, and " of w^hom he would 
not presume to say, that they may not occasionally do good, 



* See the view of Dr. Campbell's Prelections in Theology, prefixed tb* 
liis Lectures. 



Fartkular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 32 



o 



though there be but too great reason to dread that the evil 
preponderates. And even here," says he, " I am to be un- 
derstood as speaking of the first authors of such unchristian 
separations. I know too well the power of education and 
of early prejudice, to impute equal malignity to those who 
may succeed them, whether teachers or disciples."'^ 

All this, to be sure, is perfectly agreeable to Dr. Camp- 
bell's well known sentiments on the subject of heresy and 
schism, the last of which particularly he seemed to consider 
as a breach of charity^ and not a breach of communion. For 
so he had expressly said in a work published by himself — 
*' How much soever of a schismatical or heretical spirit, in 
the apostolic sense of thiese terms, may have contributed to 
the formation of the different sects into which the Christian 
world is at present divided ; no person who, in the spirit of 
candour and charity, adheres to that which, to the best of 
his judgment is right, though in this opinion he should be 
mistaken, is in the scriptural sense either schismatic or he- 
retic. And he, on the contrary, whatever sect he belongs 
to, is more entitled to these odious appellations, who is 
most apt to throw the imputation upon others."f This 
description we find particularly applied in the work before 
us, to that poor persecuted nonjuror Mr. Dodwell, against 
whom, after a great deal more of such bitter declamation, our 
Lecturer thus goes on—" His unceasing cry was schism ;J 
yet in the scriptural sense a greater schismatic than himself 
the age did not produce. Whose doctrine was ever found 
more hostile to that fundamental principle declared by our 
Lord to be the criterion of our Christianity, mutual love ? 
Whose doctrine was ever more successful in planting, by 



* Lecture iv. 

t See his Dissertation on Heresy f prefixed to the Translation of the 
Gospels, p, 433, 434 4to. edit. 

\ This is evidently borrowed from the coarser language of Mr. Ander- 
son of Dunbarton, who had sa d of Dodwell, ♦« Schism, schism was his 
everlasting clack." See his Defence, ijfc. p. 31, 



324 Particular Defence of the Ephcopdcy of Scotland. 

means of uncharitable and self-opinioned judgments, the 
principle of hatred in its stead ? The test, to which scripture 
points is — Does the teaching in question alienate the hearts 
of Christians, or unite them ? Does it conciliate the affec- 
tions, where differences have unhappily arisen ? or^ does it 
widen the breach ? If the former, the spirit is Christian ; 
if the latter, schismatical. The former is not more produc- 
tive of charity^ the end of the commandment, or gospel co* 
venant, and the bond of perfectness, than the latter is of its 
opposite, malignity, the source of discord, the parent of in- 
tolerance and persecution."* 

We acknowledge that all this sounds well^ and shows the 
writer to have possessed a sufficient command of words for 
any purpose he might have in view. But does it afford any 
clear, distinct idea of the point in question, or serve to il- 
lustrate the scripture sense of schism, of which discord, 
hatred and malignity may be the effects^ but certainly are 
not the essence ? It is true, an apostle speaks of schisms 
among the Corinthians, even when they seemed to be of the 
same communion, and were assembled for the same pur- 
pose. " When ye come together in the church," says he, " I 
hear that there be schisms or divisions among you :"t And 

* Lecture vi. 

f 1 Cor. xi. 18. From this text it has often been inferred, that schism, 
can only mean a breach of charitY; not oi coTnmunion ; and with that 
view it was frequently referred to by the English dissenters, at the time 
when the question about occasional conformity was agitated, and many 
pamphlets were published to show, that even the apostles formed differ- 
ent communions apart from each other, though they were not scrupulous 
about mutually communicating now and then, as occasion required. It 
3Tiay, therefore, abate, in some measure, the confidence of Dr. Campbell's 
admirers, to find that he has only borrowed from others his strange un- 
scriptural notion of schism, the fallacy of which was sufficiently exposed 
by the learned Mr. Wall, author of the masterly work on Itifant-Baptismf 
who, in another publication called—" A Vindication of the Apostles from 
a very false imputation laid on them, in several English pam.phlets, vi?. 
that they refused, constant, and held only occasional communion ivith orte 
another, andv^ith me another* s churches i^* adverting to the above meii- 



Particular ty^fence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 325 

.it is likewise evident from the context, that by the schisms 
©f which the Corinthians were guilty, the apostle meant 
their breaking off into separate parties, that the rich, despis^ 
ing the poor, might partake of the Lord's supper by them- 
selves ; which was such an uncharitable and unbecoming 
division, as, if not timeously checked, would soon have led 
to that, which even Dr. Campbell acknowledges, " was con- 
sidered as the great criterion of schism, the setting up ano- 
tiler altar, beside the one altar of the bishop." But when he 
flies off from this fair and just standard, by which every 
thing relating to schism ought to be measured, and endea- 
vours to entangle the subject with a number of questions^ 
plausible indeed, but far from being pertinent, all we have 
to do, is to balance these with a few other questions, much 
more apposite and equally important, by asking in return- 
Is there no other criterion of Christianity, but mutual love ? 
Is there not ^ faith to be contended for, as well as a charity 
to be inculcated ? And is not a perversion of the former as 
much to be guarded against, as a wounding of the latter ? 
Was the beloved disciple of a schismatical or sectarian spi- 
rit, when he gave this warning to those whom he loved in 
the truth—" If there come any unto vou, and bring not this 
doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him 
God speed?"* Would Dr. Campbell himself have been 
guilty of " wounding charity," if his preaching disagree- 

tioned notion of schism, as supported by the text we have quoted, argues 
in the following manner. — " This is just as if any one should prove, that 
actual killing of a man is not in the scripture notion murder, by this 
argument, that the scripture does sometimes call hatred — murder He 
that hateth his brother is a murderer. (St John iii. 15.] Or that actual 
defiling a woman is not, in our Soviour's sense, adultery, because he 
sometimes calls lusting after her by that name If St. Paul do call thuse 
animosities, and the taking of sides, which had not yet broken out into 
actual separation, and renouncing of communion, but was in a fair way 
to it, by the name of schism, how much more would he have called it 
so, if they had proceeded to an absolute division, two altars set up in 
opposition to one another V* 
* 2 St, John V. 10. 



3^6 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy ofScotland^ 

able, though necessary truths, should at any time have of- 
fended his hearers, and made them prefer more accommo- 
dating teachers ? Yet wounding of charity^ like what he lays 
to the charge of Dodwell, we may justly say, is his " un» 
ceasing cry ;" and when he meets with sentiments conge- 
tiial to his own on this subject, he does not fail to recom- 
mend them in the strongest terms, as " conveying an idea 
of the church truly rational, enlarged and sublime !"* 

This, no doubt, may be all very fine, as intended to dis- 
play, what our learned Theologist calls — the " liberal spirit 
of the gospel ;" But we must confess, whatever shall be 
thought of our " ideas" of the matter, that " we have not 
So learned Christ," nor been taught to consider any thing 
connected with what is now termed " liberality of spirit,'^ 
as at all favourable to the pure and genuine truths of the 
gospel. These truths, we are told, are to be spoken in love ; 
but still they must be spoken and maintained, as God has 
delivered them to us ; and no separation should ever be at- 
tempted between the love which Christianity requires, and 
the truth which it reveals. That love which has not this 
truth for its foundation, is but a false appearance of charity, 
as every thing must be, which encourages men in those er- 
rors that are destructive to their souls. Yet nothing is more 
evident, than that men are too much disposed to seek this 
encouragement to themselves, and too willing to believe, 
that while they are sincere in their profession, whatever 
that profession may be, no danger is to be apprehended ei- 
ther from ignorance or error* St. Paul^ it may be presumed., 
was as sincere in his profession as any man could be, when 
*' he lived in all good conscience after the manner of the 
law of his fathers, and was zealous towards God, verily be- 
lieving, that he ought to do many things contrary to the 
name of Jesus :" And yet, after he became a Christian, he 
acknowledged, that in all this he had been no better than 

* Lecture iv» 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 327 

" a blasphemer, a persecutor, and injurious." It was a con- 
fident dependence on his own sincerity, as well as a high 
opinion of his superior knowledge, that made him so stre- 
nuously resist, before his conversion, all the evidence that 
could be offered for the truth of the gospel. And to the 
same, or similar causes, it may still be owing, that so many 
who profess to receive this faith as delivered to the church 
by duly commissioned teachers, are yet unwilling to be- 
lieve, that any such commission is necessary either for pre- 
serving the faith, or supporting the unity of the church, or 
that there is any thing wrong in heresy and schism, if they 
be only embraced, and adhered to, " in the spirit of can- 
dour and charity." 

Indeed, if by the word Church we are to understand 
every sect or party which professes to be Christian, what- 
ever be the form of its ministry, or the authority of those 
employed in its service, there can be no such thing as 
schism^ considered as a separation from the church of Christ, 
Hatred, or malignity, or something else may be found out, 
whereon to fix the imputation of schism, as something sin- 
ful in the sight of God ; but this is fividently to clothe one 
sin in the dress of another, that by giving the same appel- 
lation to both, we may seem to lessen the number of trans- 
gressions, though without diminishing the proportion of 
their guilt. This is a species of self-deceit, which every 
wise man would wish to avoid ; and, therefore, in order to 
deal honestly with ourselves, we must take care to view the 
things of religion, not according to the passions or preju- 
dices of men, but in that light only wherein the scriptures of 
truth represent them ; which is particularly necessary with 
regard to the nature of the church, and the nature of schism, 
as the latter cannot be rightly understood, without a proper 
knowledge of the former. 

For discovering the nature of any society, we generally 
have recourse to the names or titles by which it is distin- 
guished, and particularly to the descriptions given of it, by 



328 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 

those who had been employed in forming or executing the 
plan of its constitution, and drawing up the rules that were 
to be adopted for the management of its concerns. It is 
by the same means that we have come to the knowledge 
of the true nature and constitution of that spiritual society 
called the church of Christ, and which, among other ap- 
pellations and allusions, expressive of its original purpose, 
is frequently compared to a body ; — and " as we have 
many members in one body," says St. Paul, " and all 
members have not the same office, so we being many, are 
one body in Christ, and every one members one of ano- 
ther."^ And to show us more particularly what this body 
is, we are told by the same apostle, that " God hath put all 
things under the feet of Christ, and gave him to be the 
head over all things to the churchy which is his body, the 
fulness of him that filleth all in all."f It was for the edify- 
ing of this body, that the work of the ministry was ap- 
pointed, that so Christians " may grow up into him in all 
things, who is the Head, even Christ; from whom the 
whole body, fitly joined together, and compacted by that 
which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual 
working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of 
the body, unto the edifying of itself in love."{ 

It is this heavenly principle of love, which maintains 
unity in the church on earth, and prevents that unhappy 
separation, which would otherwise put an effectual stop to 
the increase of the body. For this reason, " the members 
must have the same care, one for another, that there may 
be no schism in the body ;"|| and when the body is thus pre- 
served from division, it is very properly said to be edified, 
to be kept together by the cement of faith and love, so as 
to resemble a compact and commodious building, fitly 
framed for answering every purpose intended by it. This 



* Rom. xii. 4, 5. f Eph. i. 22, 23. 

I Ephes. iv. 15, 16. . |) 1 Cor. xii. 25. 



JPartkular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 3SQ 

is that " bond of perfectness," as St. Paul calls it, which 
would secure the firmness of that spiritual building raised 
*' on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus 
Christ himself being the chief corner stone." And with- 
out this sound, cementing principle of unity, the firmest 
foundations, the stateliest walls, the best disposed apart- 
ments, would soon become no better than naked and de- 
formed ruins, open to every storm, and exposed to all the 
desolation of wasting elements. It is under these, and 
such like bold and striking metaphors, that the apostles of 
Christ, and St. Paul in particular, describe the design and 
construction of that solid and durable edifice, reared by 
them after the model left them by their blessed Master, and 
so different from the airy, fantastic structures which latter 
ages have exhibited, according to the humours of the times, 
and the ever-varying fancies of popular phrensy. But 
from the view which we have already taken of the first es- 
tablishment of the Christian church, it must have suifi» 
ciently appeared, in what a happy manner the spirit of 
unity knit all the members together, and how careful every 
one was to know himself, his station, and his duty, and to 
think and act soberly, according to the situation which pro- 
vidence had allotted to him.-^As the great Head of the 
church had appointed divers orders and officers in it, they 
could not but see the necessity of preserving the subordi* 
nation which he had established ; and they all conspired, 
" as workers together" for the same blessed purpose, to be 
faithful in their several departments, each contributing his 
best endeavours " to the perfecting of the saints, to the 
work of the ministry, to the edifying of the body of 
Christ." 

Such, then, being the nature and design of the Christian 
church, considered as a visible society, formed by Christ 
himself^ for the gracious purpose of uniting men to him, 
in faith, love and obedience here, and by that means, in 
everlasting glory hereafter, we may well suppose, that swch 

43- 



330 Patticular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 

a holy and heavenly society, so evidently designed for the 
happiness of mankind, would not fail to awaken the spite 
and envy of that spiritual enemy, who having, from the 
beginning of the world, acted in opposition to the Saviour^ 
has been emphatically called the Destroyer^ as perpetually 
bent on the destruction and misery of the human race* 
No sooner was the church founded on earth, than the 
malice of hell was directed against it ; and as the power o^ 
its adversary could not prevail, for its total overthrow, his 
great object was, to render it as ineffectual as possible to 
the merciful purpose for which it was intended, by under- 
mining it secretly in the way of discord and division, when 
he could not beat it down directly by an open and bold 
attack. 

Hence, then, we may discover the nature and origin of 
that sin against the church, and, consequently, against its 
divine Founder, which Christians have been long and 
earnestly warned to avoid, as most dangerous and deadly, 
under the name of schism^ a word which, from the scrip- 
tural application of its original meaning, must signify a 
cutting off, or separating from that ecclesiastical body, of 
which Christ is the Head, and, therefore, a deprivation of 
that nourishment and strength which he affords to all his 
faithful members. This was undoubtedly the primitive, 
nay, the apostolical sense of the word schism^ whatever at- 
tempts may have been made to pervert its natural meaning, 
and give a softer turn to the application of it. Custom, 
which reconciles us almost to every thing, has brought us at 
last to look upon the divisions which now take place among 
those who profess to be Christians, in a very different light 
from that in which they would have been viewed in the 
primitive days of the church : And something which we 
have substituted for true Christian charity, requires us, it 
seems, to believe, that the church of Christ is to be found, 
and, therefore, salvation to be obtained, in any society, or 
with any denomrination of persons professing to be Chris- 



Farttcular Defence of the Episcopaey of Scotland, 331 

tians. Hence it must necessarily be inferred, that as some-, 
thing called a church may be found every where^ that which 
we call schism can be found no where. This matter, how- 
ever, is very differently represented in the inspired writ- 
ings of the New Testament ; and if the constitution of the 
Christian church be the same now that it was in the days 
of the apostles, the sin of schism must be the same like- 
wise ; consisting still, as it did then, in a cutting oif, or 
being cut off, from the body of Christ, a separation from 
the communion, an encroachment on the government, and 
a breach in the unity of his church. But the nature and 
consequences of schism have been so well described by a 
late eminent divine of the church of England, and in such 
a concise and energetic manner, that we hope to be excused 
for giving the following extract from one of his popular 
and most useful tracts, as fully expressive of our own sen- 
timents on this subject. Having pointed out some prevail- 
ing errors with respect to government, and the setting up 
the power of the people as supreme, whereas the scripture 
assures us, that " there is no power but of God ;" he then 
proceeds to give an account of that, which has the same 
effect in the church, that rebellion or sedition has in the 
state, and his words are these : 

" The same principle which disturbs the order of civil 
government, breaks the peace of the church. When it 
operates against the state, it is called the power of the peo^ 
pie ; but in religion it is called private judgment^ and some- 
times con*a>72ce ; but it always acts against the judgment 
of authority. It has been a great misfortune of late times, 
that we have been partakers in other men's sins, by making 
too light of the offence and danger of schism. What self- 
interest denominates liberality and charity, is really nothing 
but indifference or ignorance. The church being the church 
of God, it cannot be in the power of man to put ministers 
into it, and give them authority to act. The rule of the 
scriptures is therefore absolute, that no man taketh this 



Mt Particular Defence of the Episcepdcy of Scotland, 

honour unto himself but he that is called of God^ which 
calling must be visible, because that of Aaron was so, who 
is the pattern in the scriptures.— Ministers in the Christian 
church act, for God, to the people ; which they cannot do 
without God's commission.— The rule, and its reason, are 
both plain to common sense, and want no explanation. It 
is to be considered farther, that if the promises of God are 
made to his church, no man can expect to obtain them, by 
joining himself to any other company of men, after his own 
fancy. The ark of Noah was a pattern and pledge of the 
church of Christ ; and the persons saved in it, were saved 
by water, as we are by baptism ; so the church of England 
understands it. Now, let us only ask ourselves, what be- 
came of those who were out of the ark ? The parallel will 
suggest what great danger there must be to those v/ho were 
out of the church. Thus did primitive Christians argue^ 
and unless they had privileges which we have lost, we nmst 
argue in the same manner now. If not, we do dishonout^ 
to the grace of God, who hath mercifully taken us into the 
ark of his church, and our indifference will do no good 5 
nobody will be gained by it ; offences among men will ht 
multiplied, and the authority of God's religion will be 
weakened ; for if the church may be any thing, men will 
soon conclude it may be nothing ; and who will not own, 
if his eyes are open, that much of the relaxation and con- 
fusion of latter times hath arisen from the poor, low ideas 
which some good men have entertained and propagated 
upon this great subject ? Others who have dared to argue 
of late years as Christians did of old, have been branded 
with the name of high churchmen^ and very deservedly 5 
for we know of no other true churchmen j but faction, 
seeking rest for itself, can find none, but by inventing 
names and distinctions which have no sense in the mouth 
of a Christian ; they are all of this world, and calculated to 
serve some carnal purpose. Wise people should consider, 
that v/hatever examples there may have been of piety, 



Farficular Defenee of the Episeopacy of Scotland, $3S 

learning, wit or wisdom, joined with schism, they can 
never prove that schism is no sin ; no man can be taken as 
authority against the laws of God ; and the great law of 
charity is supreme over all. It is not kindness, but mean- 
ness, which shows respect to sin in any man ; for no man's 
person can render sin respectable. What is convenient to 
him, if pernicious in itself, and its consequences, ought td 
be detestable to us ; and if offence must be given, it it 
better to offend man than God. Tenderness tp schism may- 
be a fine thing, and pass for true piety, so long as men 
shall judge one another : But when God shall judge us all, 
it must give an account of itself to him, who is no respectet 
of persons."^ 

From this most just and accurate account of schism^ 
where a borrowed ray from the true light of the gospel 
shines in every period, we may clearly see what it is, which 
"the -great law of charity" requires of us. It is not to 
find excuses for those who prefer any communion of their 
own invention to that of the Chi'istian church, and would 
convert into a Babel of confusion, what was designed to 
be " as a city that is at unity in itself." This is but a poor 
sort of charity, which has nothing to bestow but indulgence 
for error, and would rather allow the misguided traveller 
to lose his way and perish, than be at any pains to show 
him the path of life, or that light from above, which 
" would guide his feet into the way of peace." When we 
are taught to pray, in one of the collects of our church, 
that God would " pour into our hearts that most excellent 
gift of charity, the very bond of peace, and of all virtues," 
we are thereby put in mind, that the gift, which we thus 
implore from heaven, is given for the sole purpose of bind" 
ing us together in peace and unity on earth ; and when it 
ceases to operate in this manner, it is no longer that true 

• See " A Letter to the Church of England, pointing out some popular 
errors of bad consequence; by an old friend and servant to the church s^ 
X)nblished with the other i\-orks of the Rev, William Jones^ 



334 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy Of Scotland, 

Christian charity which is founded in faith, and supported 
by hope, and can no more exist without these two, than 
the end can be obtained without using the means. While, 
therefore, we pray for the gift oi charity^ as persons united 
in one hope of our calling, we must also contend for the 
one faithj which was once delivered to the saints ; and of 
this faith, we are taught to receive the belief of " the holy 
catholic church," as a most essential and important article. 

In this light we have now considered it very fully, and 
in such a manner as appears to us to be most consistent 
with the design for which it is revealed to us in scripture, 
and has always made a part of the Christian creed. If the 
view we have taken of it, shall be considered as exhibiting 
a strong attachment on our part to that side of the contro- 
versy, which the opposers of our principles have thought 
proper to distinguish by, what they suppose to be, the 
odious appellation of High-Churchy we have only to answer, 
in the words of a distinguished prelate of the church of 
England, that " we are not to be scared from our duty by 
the idle terror of a nick-name, artfully applied in violation 
of the true meaning of the word," to bring discredit on the 
principles of those who, disclaiming any sort of divine 
right to those powers, honours and emoluments, with 
which the priesthood may be adorned by the wisdom or 
piety of the civil power, are yet anxious to maintain the 
importance of its spiritual commission, and not ashamed to 
acknowledge, that there is in the sacred character somewhat 
more divine than may belong to the mere hired servants of 
the state, even that spiritual authority which is necessary 
for the administration of Christ's spiritual kingdom. Ac- 
cording to this sense of the word, adds the learned and 
venerable Bishop Horsley, " we must be content to be 
High-Churchmen^ or we cannot be churchmen at all. For 
he who thinks of God's ministers, as the mere servants of 
the state, is out of the church — severed from it by a kind 
of self-excommunication. — But for those who have been 



Paf^tkular Defense of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 355 

nurtured in its bosom, and have gained admission to its 
ministry, if from a mean compliance with the humour of 
the age, or ambitious of the fame of liberality of senti- 
ment (for under that specious name, a profane indifference 
is made to pass for an accomplishment) they affect to join in 
the disavowal of the authority which they share, or are si- 
lent, when the validity of their divine commission is called 
in question ; for any, I hope, they are few, who hide this 
weakness of faith, this poverty of religious principle, un- 
der the attire of a gown and cassock, they are in my estima- 
tion little better than infidels in masquerade."* 

This, we trust, will serve as an apology for the attempt 
that has now been made to vindicate the principles, and 
support the sacred character, of the bishops and clergy of 
the Scotch Episcopal church. That " the validity of our 
divine commission has been called in question," in a man- 
ner which we surely did not provoke, and from a quarter 
-where we could hardly have expected to meet with such 
severe, unhandsome treatment, is a fact which cannot be 
doubted by any one, who reads with attention those parts 
of Dr. Campbell's Lectures on EcclesiasticalHistory^ which 
are particularly levelled against the Episcopacy of Scotland, 
and who at the same time is acquainted with the history of 
that Episcopacy for at least a century past, and knows how 
little foundation there was for such a violent and unexpected 
attack. From this consideration, perhaps it may be in- 
ferred, that the weapons of an adversary so incautiously 
aimed, might have been allowed to spend their force, and 
fall harmless to the ground. It may no doubt be thought 
a needless waste both of time and labour, to employ them 
in the refutation of arguments which, like all those that 
have ever been produced against Episcopacy in general, 
have been already so often refuted ; or even to take so 

* See the truly excellent charge delivered by Dr. Horsley, when Bi- 
shop of St. I'Javid's, to the clergy of his diocese, at his primary vi^itjsi' 
won in the year 1790. 



S36 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland* 

much pains in defending our own Episcopacy in particular, 
from an attack, which has nothing but its novelty, and 
perhaps the character of its author to support it. With 
respect to the former, we have already said all that is 
necessary to show, how little strength there is in it. In 
regard to the latter, we could wish to say nothing; be- 
cause we are well aware how much weight will be thought 
due to it. 

Far be it from us to say any thing that could be supposed 
to detract from the personal worth, and purity of morals, 
which distinguished the character of Dr. Campbell. We 
know him to have been, in general, as his biographer 
justly describes him—-" a man of a mild disposition, and 
even temper, and who was not much subject to passion*" 
We recollect with pleasure the opinion delivered by him in 
favour of a repeal of the penal laws, which, in times of civil 
commotion, had been passed against the Scotch Episcopa* 
lians, as well as against those of the Roman catholic persua- 
sion. And as far as we were concerned in the relief which 
was obtained from the severity of these statutes, all due 
acknowledgment was made, for the friendly part which 
Dr. Campbell had acted in recommending the measure, as 
reasonable in itself, and what, he thought, would be gene* 
rally agreeable to the established church of Scotland. To 
express our gratitude on that occasion to him, and to every 
one else who had any hand in procuring for us the tolera-^ 
tion which we now happily enjoy, was both our bounden 
duty, and our earnest desire ; and we cannot charge our- 
selves with any neglect of what was so justly incumbent ©n 
us. Yet our spiritual character we must regard as of infi- 
nitely greater consequence, than any temporal indulgence 
which we can possibly meet with: And as it was Dr. 
Campbell's avowed opinion, that " true religion never flou- 
rished so much, nor spread so rapidly as when, instead of 
persecuting, it was persecuted, and instead of obtaining sup- 
port from human sanctions, it had all the terrors of the ma^ 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 33f 

^Strate, and the laws armed against it,"* we have some 
reason ta suspect, that the removal of these terrors wa^ 
considered a» no great support to our cause, while room 
was left to beat it down from another quarter, and a proolT 
of the invalidity of our clerical orders was thought to be a 
severer blow than any effect of fines and imprisonments,* 
Relieved as we have been from the latter by the clemency 
of government, we must still feel the weight of the former, 
if not repelled by the force of those arguments^ which 
the cause we have to maintain so plentifully affords : And 
should these be found to fail in producing the designed ef- 
fect on every unprejudiced mind, it must be owing to the 
weakness with which they are urged, and not to any want 
of strength in the arguments themselves. One thing we 
wish to be constantly renaembered^ that this dormant con?- 
troversy has not been revived on our part from any other 
motive than what has arisen from absolute necessity : And 
whatever has been said in the course of ou;* reasoning: 
against some of the portions laid down by Dr. Campbell, 
has been brought forward entirely in our own defenee, andl 
to assert our right to that firm ground, on which the belief 
of Episcopacy as a divine institution has hitherto restecl 
with inviolable security. 

Had our Professor's Theological l,cctures been confined 
to the chair from which they were delivered, and reached 
»o farther than the cjrcle af his pupils, we should not have 
been obliged to take any notice even of that part of thenx 
which was directly intended to oppose the principles and 
pretensions of what he calls the " Scotch Episcopal party j'' 
because, as an established Lecturer, he had a rig^ht to in- 
struct his students as he thought proper, in the peculiar 
tenets of his own and their profession. But when these 
instructions were committed to the press, and published tQ 

• See his " Address to the people of Scotland, on the alarms which h*^ 
been ]^aise^ by the bill in favour of the Roman Catholijs." 

^3 



338 Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland. 

the world, for the evident purpose of impressing on the 
public mind, not only a mean and unfavourable idea of the 
established form of church government in the other part 
of the kingdom, but a thorough contempt of what still re- 
mains of the ancient establishment of this country, we 
could not allow ourselves to be wholly silent on a subject, 
with which our best and dearest interests are so intimately 
connected, nor suffer the Episcopal church of Scotland to 
appear as without a friend in the day of her humiliation, 
complaining as it were, in the words of the prophet, " that 
there was none to take her by the hand, of all the sons 
that she had brought up." — If it shall be said, that the ap- 
pearance we have now made in her defence would not have 
been attempted, had the person himself been alive, out of 
whose hands we have endeavoured to rescue her credit and 
character, it may be sufficient to answer, that if he had in- 
tended the attack to be make in such an open and public 
manner, he would have conducted it after a different form, 
and so as to have exhibited a more satisfying evidence of 
the truth of what has been said in his favour, " that he 
was uncommonly liberal to those who differed from him in 
religious opinions." If, indeed, he was so liberal to the 
infidel Hume, as " to expunge or soften every expression 
that either was severe, or was only supposed to be offen- 
sive,"^ in his controversy with that sceptical philosopher, 
we might hope, that he would have been no less so to a 
society, or even " party," as he calls them, professing to be 
Christians, and avowing a sincere and uniform belief in 
all the great truths of divine revelation,']' But if we must 



* See the Account of his Life and Writings, prefixed to his Lectures, 
p. 16. 

f We have already taken some distant notice of the favourable opi-r 
liion which Dr. Campbell entertained of the sentiments professed by one 
of the most insidious* and inveterate enemies of Christianity, and shall 
now produce a more direct proof of it, in the following letter written 
b/ our Professor to Mr. Strahan, the printer, and dated— June 25, 1776. 



V> 



Particular Defence of the Episcopacy of Scotland, 339 

not presume to call in question the assurance given to the 
public, that these Lectures on Ecclesiastical History were 
transcribed, and revised, and prepared for the press by the 
author himself, we can only regret that we are obliged to 
rely on the truth of this information ; and in that case may 
justly apply an observation which was made on a similar 
occasion, that " when an author charges his blunderbuss 
to be fired off by his executors, it looks as if he himself 
was afraid of the recoil." 

We shall now take our leave of Dr. Campbell, with 
much concern for having been compelled to accompany him 

so long through that thorny field of controversy into which 

I* ' _ 

** I have lateJy read over one of your last winter's publications with 
i^ery great pleasure, and, I hope, some instruction. My expectations 
were indeed high when I began it; but I assure you, the entertainment 
I received, ipreatly exceeded them. What made me fall to it with the 
greater avidity was, that it had in part a pretty close connection with a 
subject I had occasion to treat sometimes in my theological lectures, to 
wit^ the rise and progress of the hierarchy : And you will believe, that 
1 was not the less pleased to discover, in an historian of so much learn- 
ing and penetration, so great a coincidence with my own sentiments, in 
relation to some obscure points in the Christian antiquities. I suppose, I 
need not now inform you, that the book I mean is Gibbon's History of 
the Fall of the Roman Empire, which, in respect of the style and man- 
ner, as well as the matter, is a most masterly performance," — See MiS" 
cellaneous Works of Edward Gibbon, Esq. &c. published in 2 vols, quarto, 
by John Lord Sheffield, 1796. In this letter we cannot but observe the 
most unqualified approbation given to a work, which, even from what 
was then published of it, justified too well the remark that was after- 
wards made on the whole, that — ** the author often makes, where he 
cannot readily ^W, an occasion to insult our religion ; which he hates so 
cordially, that he might seem to revenge some personal injury." Yet a 
coincidence in sentiment, with respect to " some obscure points in the 
Christian antiquities," was sufficient to make our theological Lecturer 
applaud, in the most flattering terms, this avowed bater of Christianity. 
It was enough to secure every encomium which Dr. Campbell could be- 
stow, that this impious scoffer at the worship and worshippers of Christ 
held the same opinions as those which the Doctor himself maintained, in 
relation to the " rise and progress" of, what they both join ia making 
the constant butt of their raillery—the hierarchy. 



340 Farticular tiefince ^fthe Ep{$c$pacy ofSeotland. 

we have been reluctaiiitly dragged. Nothing cx)iild have 
induced us to enter on it but an iniperious sense of duty^ 
Remanding every effort in our power to protect our ecclesar 
Mistical polity from the effects of that sharp and severe treat<* 
lnent which it has unfortunately experienced at the hands 
f)f one of the jjaost distinguished of our countrymen. It i§ 
wkh pain that we reflect on a great part of the publicatioH 
now before us^ and hence unhappily feel a diminution of 
that respect which we would gladly have entertained for 
lihe memory of Dn CampbeD. He has, however, afforded 
lis an opportunity of reviewing the grounds on which our 
principles have so long stood firm and unshaken, resisting 
all the force of irony and declamation, even when aided by 
the still ipore powerful influence of worldly interests And 
liaving thus, as we think, fully established what was pro- 
posed as the subject of this chapter,— -that a part of the 
holy, catholic and apostolic church of Christ, though de- 
prived of the support of civil establishment, does still exisjt 
in this country under the naine of the Scotch Episcopal 
Churchy whose doctrine, discipline and worship have been 
happily found to agree with that of the first aiid purest age^ 
of Christianity; it will now, we trust, be aij easy matter 
to show that these ought to be steadily adhered to by aH 
who profess to be of the Episcopal commutiion in this part 
of the kingdom ; the showing which, in as plain, inoffen-^ 
sive, and concise terms as possible^ will, in our humble 
opinion, form a very suitable conclusion to the design for 
which these persons have been addressed on the present 
occasion. 



APPENDIX, 



No. I. 



XHE following List of Consecrations, with their dates^ 
and the names of the consecrators, as extracted from their 
ecclesiastical register, will give a clear and distinct view of 
the Episcopal succession in Scotland since the Revolution, 
as far as the preisent bishops are concerned. 

Januarif 25, 1705* Mr. John Sage, formerly one of 
the ministers of Glasgow, and Mr. John Fvli^arton, 
formerly minister of Paisley, were consecrated at Edin* 
burgh by John Paterson, Archbishop of Glasgow, Alex- 
ander Rose, Bishop of Edinburgh, and Robert Douglas, 
Bishop of Dunblane.^ Bishop Sage died in yune^ 17H.-<* 
Bishop Fullarton succeeded Bishop Rose, as Bishop of 
Edinburgh, in 1720, and died in May^ 1727. 

April 28, 1709. Mr. John Falcon ar, minister at 
Cairnbee, and Mr. Henry Christie, minister at Kinross, 
were consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop Rose, of Edin- 
burgh, Bishop Douglas, of Dunblane, and Bishop Sage. 
Bishop Christie died in 1718, and Bishop Falconer in 1723« 

August 25, 1711. The honourable Archibald Camp- 
Bell, who had been long in priest's orders, and resided 
mosdy in London, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop 

* Archbishop Paterson, Bishop Rose, and Bishop Douglas, with the 
other b'shops of Scotland, were deprived at the Revolution by the civil 
power, because Episcopacy had been voted an insupportable grievance by 
tho Scotch convent ien. 



34» Appendix, 

Rose of Edinburgh, Bishop Douglas of Dunblane, and 
Bishop Falconar. He was elected Bishop of Aberdeen in 
1/21, which charge he resigned in 1724— and &^yw;2e 
16, 1744. 

February 24, 1712. Mr. James Gadderar, formerly 
minister at Kilmaurs, was consecrated at London by Bishop 
Hickes,^ Bishop Falconar, and Bishop Campbell. He 
was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen in 1724, sind died in 
February, 1733. 

October 22, 1718. Mr. Arthur Millar, formerly 
minister at Inveresk, and Mr, William Irvine, formerly 
minister at Kirkmichael, in Carrick, were consecrated at 
Edinburgh, by Bishop Rose of Edinburgh, Bishop Ful- 
larton, and Bishop Falconar. Bishop Irvine died Novem- 
ber 9, 1725. Bishop Millar succeeded Bishop Fullarton, 
as Bishop of Edinburgh, and Primus,'\ and died October 9, 
1727. 

After the death of Bishop Rose of Edinburgh, which, 
happened March 20, 1720, 

October 17, 1722. Mr. Andrew Cant, formerly one of 
the ministers of Edinburgh, and Mr. David Freebairn, 
formerly minister of Dunning, were consecrated at Edin- 
burgh, by Bishop Fullarton, Frimus, Bishop Millar, and 

■ * Dr. George Hickes, formerly dean of Worcester, was consecrated 
in the Bishop of Peterborough's chapel, in the parish of Enfield, Fe- 
bruary 23d, 1693, by Dr. William Lloyd, Bishop of Norwich, Dr. 
Francis Turner, Bishop of Ely, and Dr. Thomas White, Bishop of 
Peterborough. Dr. Lloyd, Dr. Turner, and Dr. White, were three of 
the English bishops who were deprived, at the Revolution, by the civil 
power, for not swearing allegiance to William IIL They were also three 
of the seven bishops who had been sent to the Tower by James IL for 
refusing to order an illegal proclamation to be read in their dioceses. 

f Anciently no bishop in Scotland had the title of Archbishop, but one 
of them had a precedency, under the title of Primus Scotia: Episcopus. 
In consequence of the revolution, after the death of Bishop Rose of Edin- 
burgh, the Scotch bishops reassumed the old form, one of them being 
elected Primus^ with power of convocating and presiding, according to 
their canons made in 1743. 



Appendioi. 34^ 

Bishop Irvine. Bishop Cant died in 1721. Bishop Free- 
bairn was elected Primus in ITSl, afterwards Bishop of 
Edinburgh, and died in 1 7^9. 

June 4, 1727. Dr. ^Qhomas Rattray, of Craighall, 
was consecrated at Edinburgh by Bishop Gadderar, Bishop 
Millar, and Bishop Cant. He was appointed Bishop of 
Dunkeld, succeeded Bishop Freebaim as Primus^ and died 
May 12, 1743. 

June 18, 1727. Mr. William Dunbar, formerly mi- 
nister^ at Cruden, and Mr. Robert Keith, presbyter in 
Edinburgh, were consecrated at Edinburgh, by Bishop 
Gadderar, Bishop Miliar, and Bishop Rattray. Bishop 
Dunbar was first appointed Bishop of Moray, and after- 
wards of Aberdeen, on the death of Bishop Gadderar in 
1733. He died in 1746. Bishop Keith was first appointed 
Bishop of Caithness, afterwards of Fife. He was elected 
Primus after the death of Bishop Rattray, and died in 
^yanuary^ 1756. 

June 24, 1735. Mr. Robert White, presbyter at 
Cupar in Fife, was consecrated at Carsebank, near Forfar, 
by Bishop Rattray, Bishop Dunbar, and Bishop Keith. — ^ 
He was appointed Bishop of Dunblane, succeeded Bishop 
Keith as Primus^ and died in August^ 1761. 

September 10, 1741. Mr. William Falconar, pres- 
byter at Forres, was consecrated at Alloa, by Bishop Rat- 
tray, Primus^ Bishop Keith, and Bishop White. He was 
£rst appointed Bishop of Caithness, afterwards of Moray; 
succeeded Bishop White as Primus^ and died in 1784. 

October 4, 1742. Mr. James Rait, presbyter at Dun- 
dee, was consecrated at Edinburgh by Bishop Rattray, 
Primus^ Bishop Keith, and Bishop White. He was ap- 
pointed Bishop of Brechin, and died in 1 777* 

* Those clergymen, who, in consequence of the Revohition, were 
(deprived of their parishes, are in this list called ministers: And those 
who had not been parish-ministers, under the civil establishment, are 
Called presbyter!,-. 



344 AppendziC* 

August 19, 1743. Mr. John Alexakder, presbytei- at 
Alloa, was consecrated at Edinburgh by 3ishop Keith^ 
Primus^ Bishop White, Bishop Falconar, and Bishop Kait« 
He was appointed Bishop of Dunkeld, and died in 1776, 

July 17, 1747. Mr. Andrew Gerard, presbyter m 
Aberdeen, was consecrated at Cupmr, in Fife, by Bishop 
White (having commission from Bishop Keith, the Primus^ 
for that effect). Bishop Falconar, Bishop Rait, and Bishop 
Alexander. He was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen, and 
died in October^ 1 767. 

June 24, 1762. Mr. Robert Forbes, presbyter m 
Leith, was consecrated at Forfar by Bishop Falconar, 
Primus^ Bishop Alexander, and Bishop Gerard. He was 
appointed Bishop of Ross and Caithness, and died in 1 776* 

September 21, 1768. Mr. Robert Kilgour, presbyter 
in Peterhead, was consecrated at Cupar, in Fife, by Bishop 
Falconar, Primus^ Bishop Rait, and Bishop Alexander, 
He was appointed Bishop of Aberdeen, succeeded Bishop 
Falconar as Primus^ in 1784, and died March 22, 1790. 

August 24>, 1774. Mr. Charles Rose, presbyter at 
Down, was consecrated at Forfar, by Bishop Falconar, 
Primus, Bishop Rait, and Bishop Forbes. He was first 
appointed Bishop of Dunblane, afterwards of Dunkeld, and 
died in April, 1791. 

jfune 27, 1776. Mr. Arthur Petrie, presbyter at 
Micklefolla, in Fyvie, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bi- 
shop Falconar, Primus, Bishop Rait, Bishop Kilgour, and 
Bishop Rose. He was first appointed co-adjutor to Bishop 
Falconar, whom he afterwards succeeded as Bishop of 
Moray, and died April 19, 1787. 

September 25, 1782. Mr. John Skinner, presbyter ia 
Aberdeen, was consecrated in the chapel at Luthermuir, 
by Bishop Kilgour, Primus, Bishop Rose and Bishop Petrie. 
He was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Kilgour, on whose 
resignation he succeeded to the charge of the diocese of 



Appendix. 34j^ 

Aberdeen, in October, 1786, and was elected Prhnm in 
December, 1788. 

March r, 1787. Mr. Andrew Macfariane, presby*. 
ter in Inverness, was consecrated at Peterhead, by Bishop 
Kilgour, Primus^ Bishop Petrie, and Bishop Skinner. He 
Was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Petrie, whom he suc- 
ceeded soon after, as Bishop of Ross and Moray. 

September 26, 1787. Dr. William Abernethy Drum^ 
MOND, one of the presbyters of Edinburgh, and Mr. John 
Strachan, presbyter in Dundee, were consecrated at 
Peterhead, by Bishop Kilgour, Primus^ Bishop Skinner, 
and Bishop Macfarlane. Bishop Abernethy Drummond 
was first appointed Bishop of Brechin, and afterwards of 
Edinburgh, which having also resigned, he is now Bishop 
of Glasgow. Bishop Strachan succeeded him as Bishop of 
Brechin. 

September 20, 1792. Mr. Jonathan Watson, pres- 
byter at Laurence-kirk, was consecrated at Stonehaven, 
by Bishop Skinner, Primus^ Bishop Macfarlane, Bishop 
Abernethy Drummond, and Bishop Strachan. He was 
appointed Bishop of Dunkeld, that diocese being vacant 
by the death of Bishop Rose. 

June 24, 1796. Mr. Alexander Jolly, presbyter at 
Fraserburgh, was consecrated at Dundee, by Bishop Aber- 
nethy Drummond, Bishop Macfarlane, and Bishop Stra- 
chan. He was appointed coadjutor to Bishop Macfarlane, 
on whose resignation he succeeded soon after to the charge 
of the diocese of Moray."^ 

Though the districts into which the Scotch bishops have 
divided their church are not exactly according to the limits 
of the dioceses under the legal establishment of Episco- 
pacy, yet they still retain the names, by which they were 

* A few more presbyters have been consecrated bishops in Scotland 
since the revolution; but as they had no hand in carrying on the Episco- 
pal succession, it was thought unnecessary, in making out this list, to 
mention their consecrations. 



346 Appendix, 

of old distinguished, with the exception of Fife, instead 
of St. Andrews. Every diocesan bishop has his distinct 
charge, and without assuming any other local jurisdiction 
than what was acknowledged in the primitive church for 
the first three centuries, may as properly be denominated 
bishop of the place or charge assigned to him, as St. James 
has always been called Bishop of Jerusalem, Ignatius, Bi- 
shop of Antioch, or Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage. On this 
footing the Episcopal college in Scotland consists at pre- 
sent of the following members. 

Mr. John Skinner, Bishop of Ahrdeefi, and Primus. 

Mr. Andrew Macfarlane, Bishop of Ross. 

Dr. Abernethy Drummond, Bishop of Glasgoxv, 

Mr. John Stachan, Bishop of Brechin. 

Mr. Jonathan Watson, Bishop of Dunkeld. 

Mr. Alexander Jolly, Bishop of Moray. 



No. II. 

A HE Letters of Consecration granted to Bishop Sage in 
1705, and referred to in page 292 of this work, are thus 
expressed : 

" Apud Edinburgum, die vicesimo quinto mensis Janu- 
arii, anno ab incarnato Domino, et Servatore nostro, mil- 
lesimo, septingentesimo quinto. 

NOS — Joannes, providentia divina, Archiepiscopus 
Glascuensis, Alexander, miseratione divina, Episcopus 
Edinburgensis, et Robertus, miseratione divina, Episcopus 
Dunblanensis, in timore Domini ponderantes plerosque fra- 
trum nostrorum carissimorum, et in coUegio Episcopal! 
collegarum (hoc nupere elapso, et ecclesise nostras luctuoso 
curriculo) in Domino obdormiisse, nosquc perpaucos qui 
divina misericordia superstites sumus, multiplicibus curis, 



Appendix, 347 

maibis, atque ingravescente senio tantum non confectos 
esse : Quapropter ex eo quod Deo supremo, Servatori 
nostro, sacrosanctae ejus ecclesise, et posteris debemus, in 
animum induximus, officium, caracterem, et facultatem 
Episcopalem, aliis probis, fidelibus, ad docendum et regen- 
dum idoneis hominibus committere ; inter quos quum nobis 
ex propria scientia constet, reverendum nostrum fratreni 
Joannem Sage, artium magistrum, et presbyterum Glas- 
cuensum tanto muneri, aptum et idoneum esse j nos igitur 
divini numinis prsesidio freti, secundum gratiam nobis con- 
cessam, die, mense, anno suprascriptis, in sacrario Domus 
archiepiscopi Glascuensis, supradictum Joannem Sage, or- 
dinavimus, consecravimus, et in nostrum Episcopale colle- 
gium co-optavimus. In cujus rei testimonium, Sigilla 
Joannis Archiepiscopi Glascuensis, et Alexandri Episcopi. 
Edinburgensis, (sedis Sancti Andrese nunc vacantis vicarii) 
huic instrumento (chirographis nostris prius munito) ap- 
pend! mandavimus. 

Jo. Glascuen. 
Sic subscrib. Alexr. Edinburgen. 

Ro. DUNBLANEN. 

(Log. Sigil. Episcop. Edinb.) (Log. Sigil. Archiepis. Glas.) 

In some of the subsequent deeds or instruments of con- 
secration, we find a still more direct reference to the pre- 
servation of the Episcopal succession. They are expres- 
sed in the following terms : 

NOS — &c. — — Afflictissimse hujus, cui nos Deus prae- 
posuit, ecclesise Scoticanse concordise, paci, unitati atque 
ordini qua licet et quantum in tantis et talibus angustiis 

possumus consulentes, dilectissimo in Christo fratri 

presbytero, et pastore de — , quem hodie in colle- 
gium nostrum Episcopale consecrando co-optavimus, ejus- 
dem ecclesise Scoticanse portionem, quae in provincia ecu 



34ft Appendix, 

ditione »"■ >« ■ Deo militat, specialem commendamus, ejvis- 
que curae Episcopali, usque quo clementior Deus ecclesise 
suae, sui Christi sponsse in hoc terrarum angulo — ^heu 
quantum laboranti! benignius prospexerit: Hoc etiam 
unum ardentissimis adjicientes votis, ut in Domino confi- 
sus, nullisque persecutionum procellis territus, praedictus 
floater, ne quando summus simul et sacerrimus orthodoxo- 
rum Episcoporum ordo per legitimam ordinationum suc« 
cessionem continuatus deficiat, ceu disperdatur, solicitus 
advigikt. Datum, &c. -—— 



No. III. 

ARTICLES OF UNION 

Proposed by the Rig-ht Reverend the Bishops of the Scotch 
Episcopal Church, to those Clergymen who officiate 
in Scotland by virtue of Ordination from an English or 
an Irish Bishop* 

As an union of all those who profess to be of the Episco- 
pal persuasion in Scotland, appears to be a measure ex- 
tremely desirable, and calculated to promote the interests 
of true religion ;■— The Right Reverend the Bishops of the 
Scotch Episcopal Church do invite and exhort all those 
clergymen in Scotland who have received ordination from 
English or Irish bishops, and the people attending their 
ministrations, to become pastors and members of that pure 
and primitive part of the Christian church, of which the 
bishops in Scotland are the regular governors : — With a 
view to the attainment of which desirable end, the said 
bishops propose the following Articles of Union, as the 
conditions on which they are ready to receive the above- 
mentioned clergy into a holy and Christian fellowship, and 
to acknowledge them as pastors, and the people who shall 



Appendix, 349 

be committed to their charge, and duly and regularly ad- 
here to their ministrations, as members of the Scotch Epis- 
copal Church. 

I. Every such clergyman shall exhibit to the bishop of the 
diocese, or district in which he is settled, or, in case of a 
vacancy, to the primus of the Episcopal college, his letters 
of orders, or a duly attested copy thereof, that so, their au- 
thenticity and validity being ascertained, they may be en- 
tered in the diocesan book, or register kept for that purpose, 

II. Every such clergyman shall declare his hearty and 
unfeigned assent to the whole doctrine of the gospel, as re- 
vealed and set forth in the holy scriptures ; — and shall far- 
ther acknowledge, that the Scotch Episcopal Church, of 
which the bishops in Scotland are the regular governors, is 
a pure and orthodox part of tlie universal Christian Church. 

III. Every such clergyman shall be at liberty to use, in 
his own congregation, the liturgy of the Church of Eng- 
land, as well in the administration of the sacrament of the 
Lord's supper, as in all the other offices of the church. 

IV. Every such clergyman, when collated to any pasto- 
ral charge, shall promise, with God's assistance, faithfully 
and conscientiously to perform the duties thereof, promot- 
ing and maintaining, according to his power, peace, quiet- 
ness, and Christian charity, and studying in a particular 
maimer to advance, by his example and doctrine, the spi- 
ritual welfare and comfort of that portion of the flock of 
Christ, among which he is called to exercise his ministry. 

V. Every such clergyman shall own and acknowledge, as 
his spiritual governor under Christ, the bishop of the dio- 
cese or district in v/hich he is settled, and shall pay and 
perform to the said bishop, all such canonical obedience 
as is usually paid by the clergy of the Scotch Episcopal 
Church, or by the clergy of the United Church of England 
and Ireland, to their respective diocesans ; saving and ex- 
cepting only such obedience as those clergymen, who do or 
may hold spiritual preferment in England or Ireland, owe 



*SSO ' Appendix, 

to the bishops, in whose dioceses, in those parts of the 
united kingdom, they do or may hold such preferment. 

VI. Every such clergyman, who shall approve and ac- 
cept of the foregoing articles, as terms of agreement and 
union with the Scotch Episcopal Church, shall testifv his 
approbation and acceptance of the same in manner follow- 
ing, viz. 

" At , the —— day of , I , ordained dea- 
con by the lord bishop of , and priest by the lord bishop 

of — — , do hereby testify and declare my entire approba- 
tion and acceptance of the foregoing articles, as terms of 
union with the Scotch Episcopal Church, and oblige myself 
to comply with, and fulfil the same with all sincerity and 
diligence. In testimony whereof, I have written and sub- 
scribed this my acceptance and obligation, to be delivered 
into the hands of the Right Rev. — - — •, bishop of — ■—, as 
my diocesan and ecclesiastical superior, before these wit- 
nesses, the Rev. , and the Rev. , both clergymen 

of the said diocese, specially called for that purpose." 



£ ■ 351 ; 



\The readers of this work will doubtless be gratijied with 
the following extract from the review of it, contained in 
the Anti-Jacobin Magazine, This extract exhibits a re- 
ply to Dr. CampSeWs commentary on the words of Igna- 
tius — " There is but one altar, as there is but one bi- 
shop,"^ — ynore satisfactory than that advanced by Bishop 
Skinner*'\ 

Dr. Campbell takes it for granted, that his Episcopal 
antagonists consider the unity in the second clause of Ig- 
natius's words as the numerical or physical unity of the 
bishop's person ; and, consequently, that they represent 
the venerable martyr as arguing thus : " All the altars of 
a diocese must be one, because the bishop is but one per- 
son." Ignatius, however, neither* argues, nor is supposed 
by the advocates of Episcopacy to argue, in this foolish 
and senseless manner. His reasoning is perfectly sound, 
although Dr. Campbell has either happened, or chosen, to 
misunderstand it. I'he unity intended in both clauses of 
the sentence is of the same kind ; and in neither of them is 
it numerical. In both it is an unity, not in respect of indi^ 
vidual existence, but in respect of authority, power, and 
effect. All the altars of a diocese, however numerous in 
respect of place, are one ; because the same (not numeri- 
cally) eucharistical service is, with the same spiritual benefit 
to the partakers, performed at all of them by the one autho- 
rity of Christ, derived to them through the bishop ; and 
the bishop is one, because, with respect to his own diocese, 
he is the original depositary of this one authority. Nor is 
this mode of phraseology confined to ecclesiastical subjects ; 
but, on the contrary, perfectly common. We say that 
there is but one executive poxver in the kingdom ; because, 



352 Extract from the Anti-jfacobin Remew. 

although the individuals employed in the execution of the 
laws are almost innumerable, yet they all derive their 
authority from the one authority of the king^ who, in this 
country, is the sole fountain of power. We say that the 
act or deed of any one justice of the peace is the same as 
that of any other ; not because it is numerically the same, 
but because it is of the same validity. We say that their 
authority is the same^ because^ in all of them it is the king's 
authority. In like manner We say, that every altar in the 
diocese is the same with every other ; not because they are 
numerically the same, but because they are all erected by 
the one authority of the bishop ; and because, of conse- 
quence, the eucharist received at one has the same effect 
as when received at another. 

It is true, indeed, that, in the case of both the king and 
of the bishop, this one authority happens to be lodged in 
one numerical individual person. But this is a circum- 
stance on which the propriety of the above-mentioned 
modes of speech in no degree depends ; and which, there- 
fore, as far as our argument is concerned, is merely acci- 
dental. If we find it difficult to abstract the idea of the 
one authority of the king or of the bishop, from the indi- 
viduality of the persons invested v/ith it, the difficulty is 
wholly owing to the power of early and habitually con- 
•firmed association ; for the things themselves may, cer- 
tainly, 1d€ separated, not in idea only, but in fact. The 
Roman consuls, though numerically two, v/ere possessed 
but of one supreme authority ; and when that authority 
was, occasionally, lodged, whether in one dictator, or in 
ten military tribunes, it was but one authority still. So if it 
had pleased our blessed Saviour, or his apostles acting 
under his direction, to constitute bishops, in all districts, 
by pairs, such a constitution of the church would have 
made no alteration in the force of St. Ignatius's argument. 
For then, the bishops, who, in respect of personalit)?^, were 



Extract from the Anti-Jacobin Review. ^5d 

tvfo^ would, in respect of spiritual authority and power, 
have been but one. 

We repeat, therefore, that the quibble which Dr. Camp- 
bell finds in the words of Ignatius, as explained by that 
Father's Episcopal commentators, is all his own ; and we 
strongly suspect that, by a dialectician of his eminent 
acuteness, it would never have been found, if the weakness 
of his argument had not stood in need of even this very 
feeble support. For no man knew better than Dr. Camp- 
bell, that, in all nations and languages, things are viewed 
and spoken of as, in some respects, one^ which, in other 
respects, are exceedingly different; and that physical, or 
numerical unity is, in fact, but one of innumerable kinds, 
which are hourly conceived by the human mind, and hourly 
expressed in human speech. But Dr. Campbell's conclusion 
that " the bishop's cure was originally confined to a single 
church or congregation," required that the words h Guo-ioi* 
r*)/Aov should signify one individual " communion table or 
altar;" and this signification of them, he thinks, is suffi- 
ciently secured by supposing «? iTrto-JcoTro? to mean the indivi- 
duality of the bishop's person: for otherwise Ignatius 
would be guilty of a quibble. We wonder, indeed, that 
the very words which he quotes from Dr. Burn's Eccle- 
siastical Law did not show Dr. Campbell the danger of 
building on such unfirm ground. " The cathedral church," 
says that accurate writer, " is the parish church of the 
whole diocese." The bishop, of course, and strictly speak- 
ing, is the pastor of the whole diocese. Every altar in it 
is, therefore, his altar. If we wished to speak with parti- 
cular correctness, we might say that it is a representative 
of his altar, meaning the altar of the cathedral church. 
Or if we choose to adopt a figurative phraseology, we may 
employ a language exactly analagous to that of the cus- 
toms, (which calls such a sea-port a branch of the port of 
London) and say that every altar in the diocese is a branch 
of the bishop's altai*. 

45 



V 



A REVIEW 



OF 



HAWEIS' CHURCH HISTORY, 



I2T WHICH 



THE ERRORS AND MISREPRESENTATIONS OF THAT WORK 



ARE DETECTED AND EXPOSED. 



EXTRACTED FROM THE ANTI-fACOSm REVIEW. 



REVIEW 

OF 

HAWEIS' CHURCH HISTORY. 



It was resei-ved, for our author to publish a history of 
the church, for the express purpose of proving that the 
Church of England, in which he enjoys a rich rectory, 
has deviated essentially from the original church of Christ 
in doctrine, in government, and in worship ; that prelacy is 
an usurpation^ and patronage contrary to the principles of 
the gospel j that it is the duty of the people, when the regu- 
lar clergy preach unsound doctrine, of which the most il- 
literate clown is a competent judge, to withdraw themselves 
from the church, which, in consequence, becomes schismcC- 
tical; that all establishments of one church in preference to 
another, are the offspring of a corrupt policy ; that the alli- 
ance between church and state has ever been meretricious ,- 
and that to contend for the unity of the church in any thing 
more than a few articles of faith, of difficult comprehension, 
is to be guilty of a sin enormous as that of blasphemy. 

Should any of our readers be disposed to waste his time 
in attempting to conceive by what means an ecclesiastical 
historian reconciles such opinions to the concurring testi- 
mony of the fathers of the church, we beg leave to assure 
him, that Dr. Haweis employs no means for so vain a pur- 
pose. He is perfectly aware that his book and the writings 
of the fathers can never be reconciled ; but he must consi- 
der this as a matter of no importance, since he represents al- 
most all the Catholic writers for the first four centuries as 
either so very weak or so very wicked as to be unworthy of 
the smallest credit. 



358 Review of Haweis* Church History* 

He admits, indeed, that there was something respectable 
in the character of Augustin, bishop of Hippo, and more in 
that of Athanasius ; but he characterizes Clemens of Rome, 
Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna, as very mean 
writers. 

" Justin the martyr, Origen^ Tertullian^ Pantoenus^ and 
many others, zealous indeed in apologies for the Christian 
cause, and ready to die rather than renounce their profes- 
sion, yet held a Christianity of so equivocal a nature, as to 
render it very dubious whether they had any real part or lot 
m the matter." What extravagant enthusiasts they must 
have been ! Ireneus, though he combated all the heresies 
then subsisting in the church, yet suffered " his philosophic 
opinions to mjngle with, and debase the Christian purity i"* 
and, of course, was a heretic himself ! 

*' Tertullian is a striking instance, how much wisdom and 
weakness, learning and ignorance, faith and folly, truth and 
error, goodness and delusion, may be mixed up in the com- 
position of the same person ! Though Tertullian himself af* 
fords but a very wretched specimen of Christianity^ his apo* 
logy demonstrates^ that in all the great and glorious features. 
of this divine religion, there was a people in that day emi* 
nently to the praise of the glory of God^s grace /" We really 
should have thought that the author of an apology which de- 
monstrates t/iisy must afford a tolerable specimen of Christi- 
anity ! 

Of Gregory Thaumaturgus^ so highly praised by Cave, 
and others, our impartial and charitable historian says :— * 
" I must be exceedingly hard drove for a Christian, before 
I can put such men as Gregory Thaumaturgus into the 
number !" What though St, Basil"^ compares Gregory to 
the prophets and apostles, affirming that he was actuated by 
the same spirit with them, trod in their footsteps, and his 
conversation in the gospel during the whole course of his 

* De Splritu Sancto. c. 29. 



Meview of HaweW Church History • 359 

life, from the day of his conversion to the day of his death? 
Basil was denominated the Great ; and " the title great^"^ 
says our author, when speaking of Constantine, " as far as 
my observation reaches, usually marks the most destructive, 
the most t}Tannical, and the most murderous of mankind." 

The learning and genius of Or'igen furnish great cause of 
offence to Dr. Haweis, who professes indeed no respect for 
learning in any Christian divine antient or modern. Origen, 
it is true, maintained many errors ; but our author is the 
iirst ecclesiastical historian, whom we have met with, that 
did not acknowledge his obligations to the learned labours 
of the presbyter of Alexandria. In this he is, however, con* 
sistent ; for such an acknowledgment in behalf of Origen 
could not reasonably be expected from that man, who boldly 
pronounces the labour of Connybeare^ and Warbiirton^ and 
Watson in defence of revelation, useless ; and who, notice- 
ing *' their elaborate defences of Christianity, and apologies 
for the Bible," adds, " did these ever convince one infidel, 
or make him a real convert to gospel truth ? I trow not !" 

In many things our author admits Cyprian to have been 
worthy, and to have merited all the praise he receives ; but 
in his offipe he manifested the pride of a too unhumbled 
heart (Is the heart of his censurer humbled ?) ; his episcopal 
ideas appear too elevated ; he was a visionary ; his asser- 
tion that there is only one episcopacy (Episcopatus unus 
est, cujus e singulis in solidum pars tenetur) " is unscrip- 
tural ;" though the martyr builds it on a text by St. Paul,"^' 
which obviously admits of no other meaning. No matter ; 
St. Cyprian is pleading for " the unity of an outxvard churchy 
which, in the eyes of a spiritually minded man, must be 
contemptible ;" and, therefore, our spiritually minded his- 
torian thinks himself authorized to quote the tract, De U7ii- 
tate Ecclesice^ partially and unfairly ! Nay, he thinks him- 
self authorized to affirm, that " the strong lines of popery, 

* Eph. iv. 4, 5, 6, &c. 



360 Review of Haweis* Church History* 

and a visible head of the Catholic church, whose anathemas 
were to hurl into the dust every opposer to prelatical pride^ 
had now begun to make considerable strides, and that no 
man hitherto had more contributed to this than Cyprian !" 
Yet he must know, if he knows any thing of antiquity, that 
Cyprian, in his letters to Stephen, bishop of Rome, chas- 
tises the insolence of that prelate, and contends with ear- 
nestness and great strength of reasoning for an absolute 
equality among bishops ! To belie the records of antiquity, 
is a very singular proof of the impartiality of an historian ; 
but what could be expected from the man who, while he af- 
firms that, in the age of Cyprian, " strong lines of popery, 
and a visible head of the church had begun to make consi- 
derable strides," suspects that in the very same age, " the 
name of bishop and presbyter was still synonimous !" and 
confounds Cyprian with certain bishops sent by him and the 
African synod, to converse with Stephen on heretical bap- 
tism ! To be impartial, a man must be accurate as well as 
honest. 

Of Constantine the Great, our author thus writes : " The 
bounties he bestowed ; the zeal he displayed ; his liberal 
patronage of episcopal men ;" (Are there any episcopal wo- 
men in the conventicles of Lady Huntingdon ?) " the pomp 
he introduced into worship ; and the power invested with 
general councils," (What kind of power was this ?) " made 
the church appear great and splendid ; but I discover not a 
trace in Constantine of the religion of the Son of God. 
(You are a discemer of spirits !) As an outward professor, 
and for an outward churchy no man more open, more zeal- 
ous : as a partaker of the grace of God in truth, either in 
genuine repentance for his crimes, or real newness of life^^ 
(Pray, what is the distinction between these?) " I want 
abundantly better evidence than I can see in Eusebius, who, 
like many a courtly bishops is very cordially disposed to 
exalt on a pedestal, the king that patronizes and increases 
tlieir power, wealth, and dignity !" 



Review of Haweis* Church History • 36i 

To Eusebius, the celebrated historian, our spiritually^ 
minded man allows no merit. *' He was a great fcivourite 
at court. No good sign for a bishops under two such mo- 
narchs as Constantine and Constantius, Whether he thought 
in all things as Arius, or not, it is certain he supported him 
and his adherents. He, with his namesake of Nicomedia, 
were the pillars of the Arian heresy! Eusebius is a miser- 
able voucher ; and under all the prejudices and credulity* 
that are so visibly marked in him, lam cordially thankful 
for the more credible testimony of heathen men." (Why- 
hot of heathen women T) " I fear he knew as little of real 
Christianity as his roval (imperial) disciple Constantine, 
whom he so egregiously flatters. The more I read, th& 
more I doubt the authenticity of his testimony, and dare 
not receive his history as oracular !" 

St. Ambrose of Milan is no greater a favourite of our au*^ 
thor than Eusebius. He was pious, but superstitious; ani^t 
** the piety of superstition is awfully equivocal. How high 
the spirit of true godliness was in the church of Milan, I 
must learn from something besides their church music and 
the Ambrosian chaunt. His discipline respecting Theodo- 
sius, is a glaring ^vooi oi prelatical insolence over abject su- 
perstition, and all done for the honour of the church." (Eu- 
sebius is censured for being courtly^ and Ambrose for not 
being courtly !) " The divinity of Ambrose is wretched, 
and often unscriptural j and his moral treatises insignificant* 
Of the doctrines of predestination and grace^ he appears to 
have very false conceptions :" i, e, he was no Augustinian, 
or what in modern language is called a Calvinist I 

Not one of the fathers before Augustin taught the pecu- 
liar doctrines of Calvin ; and hence our historian repeat- 
edly says of them «//, that " they are but miserable guides 
to evangelical truth !" Even of the far-famed bishop of 
Hippo himself, he says, that there is more deep reasoning, 
solid argument, precision of language, and scriptural evi" 
dence^ in one page of Edwards on Free Wijlj than in all 

46 



362 I^eview of Haweis* Church History* 

the voluminous works of Augustin put together ;" though 
it is obvious to every man acquainted with the subject, that 
Edwards reasons as a philosophical necessarian^ of the same 
school with Hobbes and Priestley^ and not as a predestH 
narian of the school of Calvin ! 

It cannot, however, excite great surprize, that Augustin^ 
and the rest of the fathers, should be considered as insuffi-* 
cient guides to evangelical truth by him who considers St* 
Paul himself as hardly evangelical. " In compliance with 
James's recommendation, he was fulfilling a part of the 
Mosaic ritual, respecting vows, in order to show that he 
continued to observe the law. Whether he owed it such a 
compliance, I have ever doubted ; this and his circumcising 
Timothy have appeared to me temporising. But Paul pro-» 
bably is right, and I am wrong." Yes, Sir, we think this 
probable ! 

As the testimony of the fathers is necessary to establish 
the authenticity of the books of scripture, it may possibly 
occur to some of our readers, to ask whether Dr. Haweis, 
who has poured upon them greater abuse than Gibbon, be a 
Christian. The question is not unreasonable, and deserves ' 
an answer, which it is proper that the author himself be 
permitted to give. 

" Having through divine mercy (says he) obtained grace 
to be faithful — hn providence r^ctrv^d my education— and 
been called to minister in the Church of England, I have 
embraced and subscribed her articles, ex animo^ and have 
continued to prefer an episcopal mode of government ; and 
I am content herein to abide with God^ till I can find one 
more purely apostolic." 

We are not certain that we understand the avithor where 
he says that he received his education in providence. All 
men of every religion, and every nation, have been educated 
under the superintending providence of the Governor of 
the universe ; and therefore on that account Dr. Haweis 
can claim nothing peculiar to himself. But if it be his 



Review of Haiveis^ Church History » 36S 

meaning that he received his education in the town of Pro^ 
vidence^ in Rhode-Island, we cannot be much surprized at 
the contempt which he professes for the writings of the 
fathers, for in North- America those writings are very little 
studied. This circumstance may likewise account for the 
following strange language of " the faithful man who is 
content to abide with God in a church under episcopal go** 
vemment." 

*' When I speak of episcopacy, as most correspondent in 
my poor ideas, to the apostolic practice, and the general 
usage of the church in the first, and generally esteemed 
purer ages, let no man imagine I plead for that episcopacy, 
which, rising on the stilts of prelatical pride^ and worldly? 
mindedness, has since overspread the earth with its bane- 
ful shadow ; or suppose those to be the true successors of 
the apostles, who, grasping 2it power and pre-eminence over 
churches, which their labours never planted nor watered, 
claim dominion over districts, provinces, kingdoms beyond 
5dl power of individual superintendance. These a//, every 
where^ and in every age^ have manifested the same spirit 
of antichrist ; and that just in proportion as their usurpa* 
tion of authority over the churches, and the consciences of 
men, hath been most extensive, most exclusive, and most 
intolerant." 

That the church of England is intolerant will not surely 
be supposed, since she permits one of her sons to publish 
such libels as this ; but that her bishops claim dominion over 
districts^ and her archbishops pre-eminence over provinces^ 
are facts which cannot be controverted. In the opinion of 
Dr. Haweis, therefore, she manifests the spirit of antichrist ; 
and it is not wonderful that " a man who has obtained grace 
to be faithful, should consider it as condescension to abide, 
in such a society, even with God !" 

But still it may be asked, upon whose testimony our au- 
thor builds this impartial history, after thus rejecting in a 
lump the testimony of the early writers of the Catholic 



S64 Me%}tew of Hawels* Church Htstortfi, 

church? Whv, to the testimony oi heathen men^ for which 
we have seen him so piously grateful, he adds that of schis-^ 
mattes^ heretics^ and apostates I Though Ignatius, as a wri-* 
ter, appears to him, " low in the scale of excellence, because 
he advances many degrees above Clemens in episcopal au- 
thority ;" though Cyprian is a blasphemer^ because " his 
episcopal ideas appear too elevated, and he says that there 
ought to be but one bishop in a Catholic church ;^ and 
though Eusebius is accused of " partiality, credulity, and 
unfair representations," yet the Novetians^ Donatists^ Me- 
letians^ and Luciferians^ are entitled to the fullest credit ; 
whilst Julian the apostate is styled almost " as good a Chris« 
tian as bishop Warburton, and a much better man."f 

The Catholic writers consider the ordination of the 
clergy as a matter of much importance, in which indeed 
they are joined by the Novetians, Donatists, Luciferians, 
and all the sectaries of those early periods ; but they con- 
tend likewise for the unity of the church, not only in doc- 
trine, but also in government and discipline ; and this our 
impartial historian condemns as an intolerable error. He 
seems indeed to look upon ordination as far from essential, 
though he admits it to be a harmless ceremony when not 
employed to exalt the dignity of the prelatical tribe ; but 
'' the preservation of the unity of an outward churchy in 
the eyes of a spiritually-minded man, must be contemptible^ 
compared with the holding the unity of the spirit in the bond 
of peace, and loving one another out of a pure heart fer- 
vently*" Nay, " the unhappy idea of the unity of the 

* Our author chooses to quote him (p. 244) as saying that there ought 
to be but one bishop in the Catholic church ; but the quotation is false. 

f We are far from approving of all the paradoxes advanced in the dl- 
'vine legation of Moses ; but vi^e believe that Dr. Haweis is the only author 
calling himself a Christian, who has cetisiired either the object or the exe- 
cution of the " discourse concerning the earthquake and fiery eruption 
which defeated Julian's attempt to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem." He 
prefers, howfever, Basnage's account of the matter, because Basnage was 
a Walloon pastor, and Warburton an English bi"sliop. 



l^eoiew of Hawezs' Church History, 365 

church under a particular mode of government^ produced the 
plenteous tares of controversy, and the abhorred mutual 
excommunications of men, whose duty it was to love one 
another out of a pure heart fervently ;" and it seems to be 
because the Novetians and Donatists rent the church, that 
they are such favourites of this worthy priest of the church 
of England ! 

Though he admits that in " the dispute about the lapsed, 
Cf prian's plan is more scriptural than Novetian's," he yet 
says expressly — " When I hear Cyprian anathematizing 
such a man, I would rather be under the curses with No- 
vetian, than utter them with Cyprian. I forbear to quote 
the high expressions, to me bordering on impiety,* with 
which he honours the episcopal order, and from whence he 
derives the claims of obedience. This seems the great blot 
in his escutcheon, and the cause of all the indefensible se- 
verity with which he treated those who presumed to differ 
from him." 

It is not merely from the pleasure which our author takes 
in reprobating a learned clergy, and in reviling the fathers 
of the church, that he expresses himself in this manner : it 
is to serve a purpose still nearer his heart. Mr. Milner 
having, in his church history, compared the sectaries of the 
present day to the disorderly Corinthians in the days of 
the apostles. Dr. Haweis says — " I am astonished, that a 
man of his Christian knowledge and experience can see any 
similitude between a multitude of gracious souls withdraw- 
ing from false teachers^ and pastors who walk disorderly, 
working not at all, and forming real churches under faith- 
ful labourers of their own choice^ and proud and wicked 
Corinthians ! Do men withdraw from godly pastors P For 

* To forbear quoting the expressions on which a charge of impiety is 
founded against a Christian bishop, who laid down his life for the truth, 
was extremely unjust ; but it was certainly prudent, because there is not 
ill the whole writings of Cyprian a single expression which will admit of 
an impious construction. 



S66 Rex}iew of Haweis* Church History^ 

one of their description in the present day, who can be 
blamed for so doing ; ten thousand withdraw from their 
parochial or heretical teachers, on the surest grounds of 
Christian obhgation. The crime and the schism is [are] 
with those who cause it [them] by their unscriptural teach- 
ing and conduct, not with those who come out from among 
them, and separate !" 

Such is the substance of the first volume of this impartial 
history, comprehending the first four centuries of the Chris- 
tian church. Of the author's " inquiries after God's secret 
ones, the remnant whom the world knoweth not, the chosen^ 
and called, and faithful," we have taken no notice ; because 
such inquiries, by whomsoever made, must, of necessity, 
prove fruitless. 

Though that part of the volume, of which 7nen can judge, 
appears to us one tissue of errors flowing from the com- 
bined sources of prejudice, pride, and ignorance ; we shall 
yet attempt no formal confutation of it, because what is not 
supported by argument, cannot by argument be overturned. 
Our author rests his cause on " his own poor opinion," as 
he very properly calls it ; and we trust that our opinion, 
though poor likewise, is yet sufficient to balance his. We 
beg leave, however, to conclude this article with a few ob* 
servations on ordtnatioriy the character of St, Cyprian^ the 
veracity of Eusehius^ and the utility of the writings of the 
Fathers in general ; because we think it of great importance 
to the peace of the church, that the people at large, but more 
especially the younger clergy, be on these subjects furnished 
with correct notions, which they certainly will not receive 
from the volume under review. 

Among the errors established by the Council of Trent, 
our reformers considered the Romish doctrine concerning 
the Christian sacrament. A sacrament was, by that council, 
declared to be " an outward sensible action, or sacred sign, 
ordained by Jesus Christy as a sure and certain means to 
bring grace to our souls. To make a true sacrament, three 



Review of HaweW Church History* 367 

things were decreed to be requisite : 1. That there be some 
outward sensible action performed ; 2. That this be a certain 
means to bring grace to the soul; and, 3. That Jesus Christ 
be the author of it. The outward action was likewise said 
to consist in something spoken and something done ; the 
thing done being called the matter of the sacrament, and the 
Words spoken, the ybrm of it."* 

, These definitions were adopted by the generality of pro-* 
testant churches; but the English reformers holding it essen- 
tial to a sacrament, that the outward sensible action or sa- 
cred sign was ordained by Christ himself'^\iA^ he sojourned 
on earth, rejected, of course, five of the seven sacraments 
of the church of Rome ; because it is obvious to every reader 
of the gospels, that baptism and the Lord's supper are the 
onlij sacraments, of which the sacred sign, including what 
is here called the matter and the form^ was instituted by 
Christ in person* Whether it would not have been better, 
with the Greek Church, to denominate baptism and the 
Lord's supper the mysteries of Christy which seems to be 
scripture language, and to have allowed the name of sacra-* 
merits to be extended to other Christian institutions, which 
certainly involve in them the obligation of an oath, we shall 
not now inquire. It is sufficient to observe, that the refor- 
mers of our church unquestionably considered the ordina- 
tion of ministers, and the right of confirmation, as institu- 
tions of Christ, though the sensible action or sacred sign 
employed in each was not instituted till after his ascent into 
heaven. 

The consequence is, that these rites have, by every true 
son of the Church of England, been at all times considered 
as of the highest importance, as ordinances indeed of Christ 

• We have transcribed this account of the Romish doctrine concerning 
the sacraments, from the work of a Romish bishop, in two small octavo 
volumes, entitled, " The sincere Christian instructed in the Faith, from 
the written Word ;" but we have compared it with Father Paul's history 
of the Council of Trent, and found the account correct. 



368 Review of Haweis^ Church History, 

through the medium of the Holy Ghost, and as laying men 
under the most sacred obligations. Some of the clergy, who, 
during the persecution under Queen Mary, had fled to Ge- 
neva and other protestant countries beyond sea, returned, it 
is true, with doubts in their minds, whether bishops and 
presbyters were not originally of the same order, and whe- 
ther presbyterian ordination and confirmation be not of 
equal validity with ordination and confirmation by bishops^ 
From affected moderation or culpable negligence of inquiry, 
the same doubts are professed by two many of the clergy at 
this day; but, except among the independents who sprung 
up under the usurpation of Cromwell, it never entef ed into 
the head of any man calling himself a Christian, to suppose 
that the ordination of the clergy is a useless ceremony, till 
it became fashionable to confound the religion of Christ 
with what philosophers call the religion of nature. 

Were Christianity nothing but a system of ethics founded 
on the relation which subsists between God as the Creator 
and Governor of the world, and man, as a rational crea- 
ture, it would indeed be ridiculous to inquire by what form 
or what authority the clergy are ordained ; because, in that 
case, the ablest moralist, whether ordained or not, would^ 
of course, be the ablest and most useful minister. But if 
Christianity be, as it certainly is, an instituted religion, 
founded on the means employed by God to restore to man- 
kind that immortality which all had forfeited by the sin of 
Adam ; and if immortality be not now, nor ever was the 
right of man, either as inherent in his nature^ or as the re^ 
ward of moral virtue^ (and this is the dictate of sober phi- 
losophy as well as of the gospel) it follows that immortality, 
if conferred upon man, must be conferred as a '-'•free gift'^ 
upon such conditions as seemed best to the all-wise Giver. 
But the rites of a religion founded on a free gift must de- 
rive all the value, and the ministers of that religion all their 
authority, not from the relations of nature^ but from the 
positive appointment of the author of the gift; and he who 



Review of Haweis* Church History, 369 

maintains that any man, who is qualified by knowledge, 
may act as a minister of the gospel, though he be not or- 
dained, must, to be consistent, claim to himself immor- 
tality, not as " the gift of God through Jesus Christ our 
Lord," but either as the inherent right of his nature, of 
which he cannot be deprived, or as a debt due by Qodto his 
merit. 

Such arrogant claims are in direct opposition as well to 
the letter as to the spirit of the Gospel ; and, therefore, he 
who has read the New Testament with any degree of 
intelligence, and believes it to be a revelation from heaven, 
must be convinced that from it only he can learn who they 
are who have authority from Christ to preach the word, 
and to administer the ordinances of his religion. Into this 
question we enter not now, having discussed it at some 
length in our ninth volume, and in our notes on Mr. Keith's 
letter published in our twelfth volume ; and if our reason* 
ings on these occasions be conclusive, it is obvious that 
something more than agreement in faith is necessary to con- 
stitute that unjon which our blessed Lord requires among 
his disciples. 

It may not, however, be altogether useless to offer some- 
thing in vindication of the mode, or, to use the language of 
the Council of Trent, " the sensible action or sacred sign,'^ 
by which holy orders are conferred in the Church of Eng» 
land. This, it is well known, is the imposition of the hands 
of the bishop, accompanied with the words which the 
reader will find in the offices for the Ordination of Deacons 
and Priests^ and the Consecration of Bishops, That impo- 
3ition of hands was Jiot the sensible action by which our Sa- 
viour conferred the last and highest order on the eleven, 
investing them with the authority which is now called 
episcopal, is, indeed, certain j because St. John assures us, 
that " he breathed on then), saying, Receive ye the Holy 
Ghost," &c. This sacred sign was properly employed by 
him, " to whom God gave not the spirit by measure," and 

>47 



3T0 Review of Haweis^ Church History, 

who himself conferred the spirit by his own authority ; but 
it would ill become any mere man, who, whatever station 
he may fill in the church, can communicate the graces of the 
spirit only ministerially. 

The apostles, therefore, instead of imitating in this in- 
stance the example of their divine Master, adopted the sign 
which, from time immemorial, had been employed among 
their countrymen in the ordination of men to offices sacred, 
or of high importance, and whioh Christ himself had em- 
ployed on other occasions. Thus, Moses, by the direction 
of God, ordained Joshua to be his successor, by laying his 
hands upon him, and giving him a charge in the sight of the 
high priest and all the congregation."^^ After his example, 
the Jews employed the same ceremony in the ordination of 
their judges and rabbins down at least to the year of our 
Lord 1170;|' and it appears from the Talmud,J that in 
the ordination of elders, three elders laid their hands on the 
head of the candidate for that dignity. 

The ceremony of imposition of hands, therefore, in the 
ordination of ministers, was transplanted from the Jewish 
into the Christian church. It was employed by the college 
of apostles in the ordination of the seven deacons -, by the 
prophets and teachers at Antioch, in " the separation of 
Barnabas and Saul, for the work whereunto the Holy 
Ghost had called them j§ by St. Paul and Barnabas, when 
they ordained (^x'^?°'^°^'^'^'^^^^'d elders in every church ;|| and 
by St. Paul when he ordained Timothy. That imposition 
of hands was meant to be employed for the same purpose in 
the church of Christ, always even unto the end of the world, 
is apparent from the injunction given by the same apostle 
to the same Timothy, to " lay hands suddenly on no man, 
lest be should be partaker of other men's sins j"^ and as the 

* Numbers xxvli. 18, &c. f Vide Benjamin, itiner. p. 73. 
^ Sanhedr. eap. i. § Acts xiii. 1 — 4. (j Acts xiv. 23. 

* This mode of appointing men to important offices has not been pecu- 
liar to the Jewish and Christian character. AVe learn from Demostiienes 



Review of Haweis^ Church History, 3 71 

Apostles were unquestionably directed by the spirit of 
Christ, this sensible action or sacred sign may be considered 
as ordained by Christ himself, though not ordained by him 
m person. 

On the subject of ordination, the Catholic writers of the 
primitive church all thought as we do ; and as St. Cyprian 
treats of it more fully than most of them, he is peculiarly 
obnoxious to the modern advocates for lay-preaching. He 
knew nothing of that Christian obligation on the grounds of 
which the people withdrew themselves, and, according to 
our author, are bound to withdraw themselves from their 
parochial teachers, and form separate churches under la- 
bourers of their own choice. On the contrary, he attributed 
all the heresies which then infested the church to such cause- 
less divisions ; and embraced every opportunity of exhort- 
ing the presbyters and deacons, as well as the people, to 
obey their respective bishops ; while he entreated the bi- 
shops to preserve unity among themselves. His tract, De 
unitate Ecclesice is one of the most valuable works of anti- 
quity, breathing throughout a spirit of peace and love, and 
written with great perspicuity of language and force of 
argument. Yet our author accuses him of prelatical pride^ 
because he concurred with Cornelius in excommunicating 
Novetian as an incorrigible schismatic. 

"That Novetian was a dissenter from the church I cannot 
perceive ; for he was a bishop as truly chosen and ordained, 
from any thing which appears, as Cornelius, He was a man 
avowedly sound in all the principles of the gospel doctrine, 
and concurring in all the discipline of the church ; nay, dis- 
posed to carry it to excess ; and besides this, there rests not 
a shadow of accusation against him." 

With your leave, good Doctor, this shadow was sufEci- 

(Oratione 1. in Philip.) that there were magistrates among the Athenians 
constituted x^iot^oncc, and thence styled x,^i§o']ovYflo!,i ; and the same thing 
appears from the v/ritings botli of Plutarch and Cicero. 



^ > 



372 /Review of Haweis^ Church History^ 

ent to condemn him. The manner in which he pi*evailed 
upon three obscure bishops to consecrate him is well known ; 
and there is not pethaps in the annals of the church another 
consecration so completely scandalous. But granting, for 
the sake of argument, that it had been otherwise, the Ro- 
man see was already filled by Cornelius, whom you acknow- 
ledge to have been sound in the faith, and unexceptionable 
in his administration of the discipline of the church. Iii 
that state of things, could Novetian claim to be bishop 
of Rome, and refuse to hold communion with Cornelius 
and his clergy, without becoming a schismatic^ or, as yoii 
properly enough express it, a dissented from the church i 
Were you to go over to America, get yourself consecrated 
by three bishops of the church of the United States, return 
to Canterbury, and claim to be rightful metropolitan of all 
England, refusing to communicate with any clergyman who 
preaches not the doctrines of unconditional election and 
reprobation, would ydu or would you not be a schismatic 
or dissenter from the church of England ? 

To this question it is possible that yod and we may be 
disposed to give different answers ; but were a clergyman^ 
calling himself the Rector of All Saints, Aldwinckle,^ to 
open a conventicle in the parish, and seduce the people 
from the church, under pretence that you had climbed over 
the wall of the sheepfold, by accepting of an unscriptural 
presentation ; and were he to rd"use holding any communion 
with you, calling you liar and traitor on account of the 
tendency of this impartial history, we are persuaded that 
you would agree with us in deeming such a man a schisnM" 
tic^ who deserved to be degraded and excommunicated by 
the bishop of the diocese. Yet his crime would be less than 
that of Novetian in the same proportion as a modern parish 
is less than the ancient diocese of Rome, and as the har- 
mony of a single congregation is of less consequence than 

* 

* Dr. Haweis is Rector of All Saints, Aldwinckie. 



Review of Haweis* Church History, 3f 3 

the peace of the church universal. But it is for passing th6 
usual censures on Novetian and his adherents that Cyprian 
Is here charged with prelatical pride and insolence^ though 
it will not be easy to find in all the records of the church 
more striking instances of humility, combined with dignity^ 
than was displayed by the bishop of Carthage on this and 
various other occasions^ 

To his deacon Pontius, who lived in hiis house^ accom- 
panied him in his exile, and was present at his martyrdom, 
his character was surely better known than to Dr. Haweis^ 
who, from circumstances to be noticed hereafter, appears 
to us never to have read a page of his original works. Had 
Cyprian been arrogant and insolent, such a domestic must 
sometimes ha.v6 Jelt his insolence. Yet, sptaking of the 
reluctance with which he yielded td the clergy and people 
demanding him for their bishop, Pontius goes on-^Quidam 
illi restiterunt, etiam Ut vinceret. Quibus tamen quanta 
lenitate, quatti patienter, quam benevolenter indulsit quam 
clementer ignoVit, amicissimos eos postmodum et inter ne- 
nessarios computans niirantibus multis ^ Cui enim posset 
hon esse miraculo, tarn memoriosae mentis oblivio ? 

Could this have been published in Carthage of a bishop 
of an unhumbled heart, at a time when thousands were alive 
to contradict the eulogiutii ? Or, would the same deacon 
have said of an insolent bishop, whose death he had just re- 
corded-— Dolebo quod non comes fuerim ? sed illius victoria 
triumphanda est. Devictoria triumphabo ? sed doleo quod 
comes non sim. Verum vobis tamen et simpliciter confi- 
tendum est quod et vos scitis, in hac me fuisse sententia- 
Multum, ac nimis multum de gloria ejus exulto; plus 
tamen doleo quod remensi. 

Our author calumniates Eusebius still more grossly than 
he had calumniated Cyprian. He admits, indeed, that " this 
famed prelate, remarkable for his knowledge, reading, and 
ecclesiastical investigations, stands eminent among the first 
authorities for church history ;" yet, as we have seen, as a 



3t4f Review of Haw els' Church History* 

divine he was an hceresiarchy and as an historian, credulous 
2Xid unfaithful ! 

That Eusebius, who was a great admirer of Origen, and 
deeply skilled in the Platonic philosophy of the Alexandrian 
school, sometimes expresses himself uncautiously on the 
divinity of Christ, must indeed be granted ; but it is impos- 
sible to consider as a pillar of the Arian heresy, the man, 

who calls Christ auloOsov very God^ and tov Ti'cy.fjJ^a.a-iXioc xat Trccvny 

fA.ovx, Kai ccvlov Q'zov^sovereig'n and leader of all thing's, and God 
by himself^ Dr. Haweis, however, from his reply to Dr. 
Maclane's vindication of Eusebius, seems to consider even 
bishop Bull himself a pillar of Arianism ; for that illustri- 
ous prelate, in his Defensio fidei Nicense, has a whole chap- 
ter de subordinatione filii. 

But granting that Eusebius was a semi- Arian, which the 
expressions quoted above will not permit us to grant, he 
may, notwithstanding, be a faithful historian. His morals 
were never impeached ; pietate adeo venerabilis (says 
Cave,'!') ut apud plurimas occidentis ecclesias in sanctorum 
numero habebatur ; and he was so little ambitious of worldly 
greatness, that he refused to exchange the comparatively 
poor see of Caesarea for the rich one of Antioch, because 
he deemed the translation of bishops from see to see disre- 
putable. What could tempt such a man to falsify the re- 
cords of the church ? He was no schismatic, nor patron of 
schismatics, that he should have written a history for the 
express purpose of proving that the church of the fourth 
century had deviated esseatially from the original church of 
Christ in doctrine, in government, and in worship ! Had 
Dr. Clarke, whom our author calls a blasphemer , written a 
history of the church of England, does any man in his sen- 
ses conclude, that because he was an Arian, or semi- Arian, 
he would have given a false detail of the succession of the 
Archbishops of Canterbury and York ? Yet, for no other 

* Hist. Eccles. lib. x. cap. 4. . f Hist. Litei-. 



Review of Haiveis* Church History, SYS 

reason than the supposed arianism of Eusebius, does our ju- 
dicious and impartial historian question the authenticity of 
the list which he gives of the bishops of Jerusalem, and ac- 
cuse the learned author of glaring prejudice and credulity ! 
But does not Eusebius publish letters which were said to 
have passed between our blessed Lord and Abgarus, king 
of Edessa ? and are not those letters apocryphal, though he 
professes to have translated them from the Syriac originals 
preserved in the archives of Edessa ? That Eusebius has 
published such letters is certain ; and to us it appears 
equally certain, that the letters are forgeries ; but we do not 
think that Eusebius was the forger, or that it is any proof 
of his extreme credulity, that what imposed upon Baronius^ 
Spondanus^ Vaksius and Vossius^ among the moderns, and 
' to which even Cassaubon and Cave seem inclined to give 
credit, imposed upon him. The Syriac originals were 
doubtless given to him as authentic ; and he inserted trans- 
lations of them in his history of the church, just as Livy 
inserted some incredible tales in his history of Rome, He 
inserted them as letters preserved in the archives of Edessa^ 
which, with other archives, had been laid open to him by 
the command of the Emperor Constantine ; and as he had 
a character to lose, and was obnoxious to a large party in 
the church, it is not conceivable that he would have appealed 
to public archives as containing letters which he was con- 
scious that he himself had forged. All that Eusebius at- 
tested as consisting with his own knowledge was undoubt- 
edly true ; and we beg our learned author, before he makes 
another attack on his character as an historian, to read with 
as much attention as he is able to bestow, the eighth chapter 
of the first part of Bishop Pearson's Vindiciw Ignatiance, 
In the mean time he may meditate on the following extract 
from that masterly performance, and prove himself, if he 
can, an abler judge of such matters than the author! 

Si autorem uUum veterem nominare posset, quam Euse- 
bius agnovit, et cujus auloritatem testimoniis aliorum con- 



3^6 jR&oiew of Haweis* Church History* 

iirmatum ivet, qui postea fictor detectus est, aut val in du*' 
bium vocatus: aliquid quidam diceret, quod eum a temeri" 
tatis et inverecundice crimine^ ut ipse loquitur, liberareU 
Ego vero Eusebium tanta diligentia tantoque judicio in 
examinandis Christianorum primaBvae antiquitatis scriptis, 
in quibus traditionem apostolicam contineri arbitratus est, 
usum fuisse contendo, ut nemo unquam de ejus fide aut 
descriptis, quae ille pro indubttatis habuit, postea dubitaverit. 
Libri qui nunc in dubium vocantur, aut olijn vocati sunt, 
testimonium ejus non habent. 

Of Dr. Haweis's diligence and judgment in examining 
the writings of Christian antiquity, some estimate may be 
formed from his calling Ahgarus Agharus ; from his sup» 
posing that " most of the Apostles lived and died among 
their brethren in Palestine ;" from his affirming that " all 
ecclesiastical officers for the first three hundred years were 
elected by the people — nay, that Matthias was thus chosen 
to fill up what he calls the tribular number of the Apostles;'* 
from 4;iis affirming that " no clainis of pre-eminence among 
the cleVgy make their appearance in the epistle of Clement 
to the Corinthians ;" and that it " was not till the reign of 
Adrian ^"dX. the bishop was supposed to stand in the place 
of the Jewish high-priest, the presbyters in the place of 
priests, and the deacons in the place of Levites."* In far- 
ther proof of his accuracy and diligence, he speaks of '' the 
Constitutions of Ignatius ^^ meaning, we suppose, the apos-^ 
tolical constitutions^ which were pretended to have been 
written by Clement ; he calls Polycarp, whom all antiquity 
represents as the disciple of St. John^ the disciple of Igna" 
tius; mistaking the name of an office for the name of a 
man, he calls Pontius, the deacon of St» Cyprian, Pontius 
JDiaconus ; and, as we have seen, he makes Cyprian him- 



* To be convinced of the rashness of this assertion, the reader need£ 
only to consult St Clement's first epistle to the Corinthians, or vol. ix. 
p. 125, of our Review. 



Review of Haweis' Church History. 377 

self an advocate for popery^ at the very time that he viras 
contending for the equal rights of diocesan episcopacy^ and 
reproving Stephen^ bishop of Rome ^ for acting as if he thought 
himself superior to other bishops ! Has Dr. Haweis read 
one page of the writings of Clemens Romanus, of Pontius, 
or of Cyprian ? 

He has certamly laboured to prove, if confident assertions 
©an be called proof, that there are none of the Fathers 
whose writings are worth the reading ; but mere asser- 
tions will have little weight in a cause where more learned 
men had employed, without success, much erudition and 
plausible reasoning. The heaviest charge which has been 
urged against the Fathers is their credulity ; but " upon an 
impartial examination of the passages, upon which this 
charge principally depends for support, it will appear, (says 
a learned writer*,) that many of the supposed errors arise 
from misrepresentation j that many relate to trifling circum- 
stances, many are dispersed among the sentiments of indi- 
viduals, and not among the tenets of the church, and have 
no relation whatsoever to public principles of belief, or pub- 
lic terms of communion. How, therefore, these peculiar- 
ities conspire to make them generally unserviceable in the 
cause of religion, it is difficult to comprehend. If any at- 
tempts to elevate the Fathers to the high rank of the apos- 
tles, were made by their advocates ; if they were affirmed 
to have been assisted by inspiration ;*i' or to have been en- 
dowed above the common lot of mankind, with infallibility^ 
tibe objection would doubtless carry great force against such 
ambitious pretensions. Bat we contend only that they de- 
serve our regard as witnesses of the opinions of their respec- 
tive ages ; as historians of the facts which were accessible to 

* Mr. Keith, in his Sermons at Bampton's Lecture. 

•j- Dr. Haweis admits the apostolical Fathers to have been assisted by 
inspiration, for he says expressly, that •♦ miraculous gifts generally ceased 
with the first generation of the Apostles' converts and successors. There* 
fdre Clement and Ignatius vsrere inspired. 

4§ 



378 Revleiv of Haweis* Church History, 

their inquiries ; and as teachers, whose piety and learning 
eminently distinguished them from all their contemporaries. 
Sharing the imperfections of other writers, they fairly claim 
the same indulgence. The faults imputed to them ought 
frequently to be imputed to the times in which they lived ; 
when accuracy of research was often precluded by nume- 
rous obstacles, and when ardent zeal induced them to press 
every circumstance into their service, which carried with it 
even the appearance of truth. If the plea of credulity de- 
serves to be admitted as a ground of rejection, with equal 
or perhaps superior force does it operate against some of 
the most celebrated authors of Greece and Rome." 

This is placing the utility of the writings of the Fathers in 
a proper light. It is as witnesses only that we plead for 
them ; and as witnesses they are entitled to the fullest cre- 
dit. Their reasonings are often weak, and their criticisms 
puerile ; but it is impossible to question the integrity of 
men who laid down their lives for the truth : What they 
affirm that they witnessed, they undoubtedly witnessed. 
Even the opinions^ in which they were unanimous— g'wi^t/ 
semper^ quod ubique, quod ab omnibus — are not to be hastily 
rejected, merely because they tally not with the dogmas of 
this or that modern school ; and the man must have a very 
high opinion pf his own understanding, who, like our au- 
thor, presumes to say that he holds xht gospel truth in greater 
purity than the bishops and presbyters of the first three 
centuries. 

" Pride, surely, was not made for man ;" and men truly 
religious are always humble. The most virtuous man on 
earth must be sensible that his good deeds cannot benefit 
his Maker ; and the most zealous and orthodox Christian, 
if he forget not that he possesses nothing which he did not 
receive, will not boast of the services which he may have 
rendered to the cause of piety and truth. It was not, there- 
fore, without surprize, that we found our most orthodox au- 
thor, in the preface to the second volume of this history, 
expressing himself in the following terms : 



Review of Haweis* Church History • 379 

" The great design of the adorable Redeemer when ht 
came down from heaven, was to procure peace upon earth, 
and good will towards men. To correspond with this de- 
sirable and blessed purpose, is the great end and object of 
this history !" 

A comparison such as this we had imagined that no man, 
whose mind is not swollen with spiritual pride, would have 
dared to make ; and we will venture to say, that the blas- 
phemer Clarke, though justly reprehensible for the notions 
which he entertained of the Son of God, never in idea com- 
pared the designs of that adorable person with his own ! He 
left such comparisons to fanatics, and to a species of mis- 
sionaries, with which, in his day, the Christian Church was 
not acquainted. 

Clarke, indeed, as well as more orthodox men, held 
hardly any principle in common with Dr. Haweis ; for he 
thought that our belief of Christianity rests on the evidence 
of miracles and prophecy ; and our impartial historian 
affirms, with a confidence, which, were the assertion true, 
could become only the searcher of hearts, that " no man 
€ver was convinced of divine truth savingly by miracle !" 
What though St. Luke assures us (Acts ix. ^5,) that " all 
who dwelt at Lydda, when they saw Eneas miraculously 
cured by St. Peter, turned to the Lord !" our author, who 
thinks it doubtful whether St. Paul or himself had imbibed 
most of the spirit of Christianity, may consider the testi- 
mony of St. Luke as originating in mistake; for the Apos- 
tle certainly understood the doctrine of saving faith better 
than the Evangelist. 

From the end of the fourth century, to the commence- 
ment of the Reformation, our author traces, with a bold 
pencil, the rise and progress of the corruptions of Christi- 
anity ; but we shall content ourselves, and, we trust, our 
readers, with a very cursory view of his detail of the trans- 
actions of that gloomy period, because his facts are authen- 
ticated only by his own assertions, and are such as furnish 



380 Review of Haweis' Church History, 

few lessons of instruction to Christians of the present day^ 
His account of the Nestorians and Eutychians, in the fifth 
century, is well told ; but his narrative of the rise, progress, 
and present prevalence of Pelagianism is in many respects 
objectionable. 

When he talks of " Cassian^ a Monk, of Marseilles, dif- 
fusing abundantly the pleasing poison of this heresy," we 
will not give ourselves the trouble to inquire whether he 
may not mean Cassiodorus^ who, from being Minister to 
Theodoric the Ostrogath, retired, in his old age, into a mo- 
nastery of his own building in Calabria, and published the 
tripartite history of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodorite, 
with various learned works of his own and other writers. 
Cassiodorus, we know, has been accused, most unjustly in- 
deed, of Pelagianism, because he published some of the 
works of Pelagius, after purging them of their errors ; but 
Cassian, as Dr. Cave observes, was " Pelagianorum hostis 
acerrimus." Even the view which Dr. Haweis gives of the 
opinions of Cassian, though not quite accurate, differs widely 
from the heresies of Pelagius. He was indeed styled by 
the followers of Augustin, a iS'^mi-pelagian, but with what 
justice the reader will perceive when he is informed that 
Cassian admitted the doctrine of original sin, and the ne- 
cessity of preventing- as well as co-operating grace. He 
contended, indeed, as St. Paul had done before him, that 
" the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against 
the flesh j and that without some such internal struggle as 
this, there could be no such thing as human virtue, nor any 
receptacle in man for divine grace ; but so far from teach- 
ing, that virtue merits heaven, as quoted by the accurate 
author of the Historia Literaria, " ex nimio fere pelagia- 
nos oppugnandi studio errores, asserit omnes justorum j*w.s- 
titias esse peccanta /" 

We readily admit, however, that in the writings of Cas- 
sian errors may be found, and that Pelagius was a heretic, 
whom our author has treated with perhaps greater lenity 



Revietu of Hawels* Church History. 381 

than, from the nature of his heresy, he could have claimed 
at his hands ; but we protest against the uncharitable insinu- 
ation, that Pelagianism pervades the Church of England at 
present ; and we shall not hesitate to pronounce Dr. Haweis 
a false accuser of the brethren, if he charge with Pelagian- 
ism, all who dissent from the dogmas of Augustin, Lu- 
ther, Calvin, and Edwards. Of the work of Edwards on 
Free-will, he perceives not, as we have already observed, 
the tendency ; and we doubt much if he fully comprehends 
the metriphysics even of his masters Augustin and Calvin. 
The following exclamation is the offspring of arrogance and 
ignorance : 

" I confess my astonishment at Mr. Milner's assertion, 
that the doctrine of particular redemption was unknown to 
the ancients ; and he wishes it had remained equally un- 
known to the moderns ; (we heartily wish the same thing). 
I am shocked that the scriptures of truth should be treated 
thus slightly, or the greatest and best of men be laid under 
so unbecoming a censure." 

Whether Mr. Milner's assertion be censure or praise, it 
is an undoubted truth, that in the writings of the Fathers, 
anterior to St. Augustin, there is nothing which gives the 
smallest countenance to particular redemption. But pray. 
Sir, when did you discover that the Fathers of the first four 
centuries were the greatest and best of men ? In your first 
volume you represent them as a crew of turbulent, credu- 
lous, contemptible liars, a sort of character to which we 
would not be hasty to apply either of the epithets great and 
good. With respect to the scriptures of truth, what right 
have you to suppose that either yourself, Calvin, Luther, 
or Augustin, understood them better than Bishop Bull or 
Jeremy Taylor ? We know your answer to this question ; 
for, after representing the Church as so totally corrupted 
in the end of the fifth century, that no genuine Christianity 
was to be found in it but among a few unknown persons, 
God^s secret ones, you thus express yourself: 



382 Remew of Haweis' Church History. 

" The state of things at that time nearly resembled the 
present. The greater dignitaries of the Church too much 
men of this world; the inferior clergy under their infuence^ 
and choosing the ministry for its advantages, or an idle life; 
and the people^ like their priests^ easily engaged in the page- 
antry of rites, ceremonies, and superstitious observances: 
though a generation was preserved, who cleaved to the Lord 
in one faith, and served him out of a pure heart ferventlv :'' 
A ver>^ pretty character this of the Church of England and 
all her great dignitaries, of whom we know none greater 
than the two prelates to whom we have referred you. 

The view of the church during the sixth century grows 
darker and darker, and presents very little that is worthy 
of the reader's attention. To our author*s narrative, how- 
ever, implicit credit must not be given ; for he inadver- 
tently acknowledges (p. 49), that he has only " looked at 
some of the writers of that age, and their works." By 
what means he obtained a sight of the writers of that age, 
he has not told us ; but we cannot help thinking that a man 
ambitious of the character of an impartial historian, was in 
duty bound, not only to look at, but to read with care many 
of the works of every age, of which he proposed to record 
the events and doctrines. 

In the seventh century arose the impostor Mohammed, 
for whose success our author well accounts, by allowing to 
him great abilities, which he undoubtedly possessed, and 
by showing what advantages he derived from the igno- 
rance, corruption, and condition of the clergy. We doubt, 
however, if Dr. Haweis has done more than look at the 
original writings of that period. To prove the extreme su- 
perstition of the age, he quotes St. Eloi of Noyon's charac- 
ter of a good Christian, which he may have found in Lord 
Kames's Sketches of the History of Man, We do not say 
that he has actually taken it from that work ; but it is some- 
what singular that an English historian of the Church 
should have quoted, without addition or diminution, the 



Review of Haweis* Church History, 383 

very passage which had before been quoted for the same 
purpose by the Scotch Judge."^ 

Our author, who, upon every occasion, betrays a fellow- 
feeling for schismatics^ is very willing to find the pure doc- 
trines of the gospel among the Paulinians of this century ; 
though, by his own account of them, they had as little claim 
to the appellation of Christians as the modem Quakers.—^ 
" They regarded the sacraments, he says, as merely allego- 
rical, and not literally to be observed ; they treated the Vir- 
gin Mary contemptuously'''' (which he seems to consider as 
meretorious conduct) ; " and in their church assemblies 
they abolished their names, [and offices} of Bishops and 
Presbyters, instituting a set of pastors, with perfect equality y 
without any peculiar rights^ privileges^ or garb to distin- 
guish them from the people !" 

His account of the struggles of the Bishop of Rome for 
universal supremacy in this age, and of the opposition 
which was made to his claims, not only by the Eastern 
Church, but by the British, Scotch, and Gallican Churches, 
and even by the Bishop of Ravenna, in Italy, would be 
valuable, had he referred us to the authors from whom the 
account is taken. The man, however, who only looks at ori- 
ginal writings might not have found this an easy task ; and, 
therefore. Dr. Haweis never attempts it. 

His history of the eighth century is a well told tale ; but 
it can be considered as nothing more ; for though in gene- 
ral true, it rests on no other authority than his own asser- 
tions. Not one quotation is given— -not one contemporary 
writer referred to. The means by which the Pope obtained 
what he has long claimed as the patrimony of St. Peter ; 
the origin of the temporal dignities of the prelates, as Dukes^ 
Marquises^ Counts and Barons ; the final rupture between 
the Eastern and Western Churches on account of image 

• See Sketches of the History of Man, vol iv. p. 376, 377, and out 
author's Impartial Hittory, vol. ii. p. 63, Sec. 



384 Review of Hatveis* Church History, 

worship ; the conquests of the Saracens, and the first for* 
midable appearance of the Turks, are all perspicuously de- 
tailed. We have likewise a concise account of the rise of 
the new Empire of the West, under Charles the son of Pe- 
pin, surnamed (says our author) Charlemagne. This, we 
suppose, was said to show his skill in the French language, 
as it is probably to display his knowledge of Greeks that a 
sect, by all other historians styled monothdites,* is by him 
uniformly called monotholites. 

In the detail of ecclesiastical affairs during the ninth cen- 
tury, we expected some account of the rise and constitution 
of the Moravian Church, which has been, from its founda- 
tion, independent both of the Roman Pontiff, and of the 
Patriarch of Constantinople ; but we were disappointed. 
Our author tells us only that it was founded in 850, by two 
Greek Monks ; and that it is sufficiently superstitious. He 
dwells, however, at some length, on the sufferings of Go^' 
teschalcus^ whom he calls a martyr for divine truth ; arid 
expresses himself in language extremely reprehensible. 

We abhor, as much as he does, all kinds of religious per- 
secution; and the peculiar dogmas of Goteschalcus — at least 
those dogmas for which he suffered, appear to us harmless, 
though certainly not essential articles of the faith ; and, in 
one sense of the words, perhaps not true. As our author 
mentions them only in general terms, as " the doctrines of 
predestination and grace," we shall lay them before our 
readers in the words of Goteschalcus himself, that a judge- 
ment may be formed of the propriety of Dr. Haweis's 
writings. 

• From /xovoj and osXw. 

t Goteschalcus, called likewise Fulgentius, on account of his eloquence 
and science, was a Benedictine Monk of Orbais in France, and flourished 
about the middle of the ninth century. Our author uniformly calls him 
Godeschalcus, thus confounding him with a deacon of the Church of 
Liege, who flourished about the year 767, and is known in the literary 
annals of the Church, as the author of the life of St. Lambert the martyr, 
a book filled with legends and lying wonders. ^ - 



Meview of HaxveW Church History » 38$ 

** Ego Goteschalcus credo et confiteor quod gemina est 
prsedestinatio, sive Electorum ad requiem, sive Reprobo- 
rum ad mortem : quia sicut Deus incommutabilis, ante 
mundi constitutionem om^nes electos suos incommutabiliter^ 
per gratuitam gratiam suam prsedestinayit ad vitam seter- 
nam : Siiniliter omnino onines Reprobos, qui in die judicii 
damnabuntur propter ipsorum mala merita, idem ipse in- 
comniutabilis Deus, per justum judicium suum incommu- 
tabiliter praedestinavit ad mortem nierito sempiternam."^ 
This is, indeed, Calvinisni sufficiently harsh \ but he else- 
where softens it in the following manner : 

*' lUos omnes iinpios et peccatores, quos proprio fuso 
sanguine filius Dei redimere yenit, hos omnipotens Dei bo= 
nitas ad vitam praedestinatos, irretractabiliter salvari tantum- 
modo velit : illos omnes impios et peccatores, pro quibus 
idem Dei filius nee corpus assumpsit^ nee orationem, nee 
dico, sanguinem fudit, neque pro eis ullo modo crucifixus 
fuit, quippe quos pessimos futuros esse prcescivxt^ quosque 
justissime in seterna prsecipitandos tormenta prsefinivit, ipsos 
omnino perpetim salvari penitus nolit."f 

In this last extract, the reader perceives that the predesti- 
nation and reprobation of Goteschalcus are conditional; and 
though he errs, not knowing the scripture, when he sayg that 
Christ was not, in any respect^ crucified for the impious and 
the wicked, whom he has certainly redeemed frona the e'uer- 
lasting power of the grave^ yet the error carries in it no- 
thing of blasphemy. Indeed, we strongly suspect, that had 
pr. Haweis weighed well the import of this passage, he 
would not have lamented so loudly and so long over the 
fate of " poor Goteschalcus and his doctrine ;" for modi- 
fied Calvinism like this, seems not to be what he calls " the 
truths of vital godliness." At any rate, it ill became him to 
stigmatize the opposers of Calvinisni in a body, with the 
,. epithets of " unhumbled, unawakened, pharisaical and 

* Apud Hincmar. de prsdest, cap. v. f Ibid. cap. xxvii. & xxix. 

49 



386 Review of Haweis* Church History* 

proud ;" for a greater proof of the pride of his own heaft 
cannot be conceived than he furnishes by thus seating him- 
self in the chair of infaUibility, and pouring forth railing ac- 
cusations against such men as the Bishops Taylor and 
Home. 

But he is still more inexcusable, if an excuse be not found 
in his ignorance, when, after using such language as this, he 
goes on to say, that " the doctrine of the Trinity hath a 
near connection with that oi predestination and grace." Was 
the late Mr. Jones of Nayland's faith in the Trinity not 
sound ? We hardly think that even our author will dare to 
say so ; and yet it is not possible for two Christians to think 
more differendy than Mr. Jones and he on the subjects of 
predestination and grace. To be convinced of this, let the 
reader only compare the two admirable letters by Mr. Jones, 
on the modem doctrine of predestination, published in the 
fifth volume of our journal, with the following modest ac- 
count which Dr. Haweis gives of himself and his brother 
Calvinists in this imperfect history : 

" The natural man receiveth not the things which be of 
the spirit of God, neither can he know them, because they 
are spiritually discerned. Happily, the Lord, in every age, 
though they were but few comparatively-^(what were few ? 
the ages !) — taught some the grace of God, which bringeth 
salvation ; and to this day a generation, according to the 
election of grace, can say wherein we stand, and rejoice in 
hope of the glory of God !!!" 

We have an account of the conversion of the northern 
nations, in the tenth centurj^ to the Christianity which was 
then professed in the churches of Rome and Constantinople ; 
and the author gives a rapid sketch, certainly not softened, 
of the shocking immoralities which prevailed among the 
clergy. No dissenter or deist could give stronger colouring 
to such descriptions ; though here, as everywhere else, we 
feel the want of references to the original authors. 

The eleventh century opens, in this work, with a brief 



itemew of Haweis' Church History • SSt 

account of the crusades in Palestine ; whence the author 
proceeds to the contests between the Emperor Otho and 
Pope Gregory the seventh ; and concludes, as usual, with a 
detail of the almost universal corruption of faith and morals. 
The period was a busy one, and the narrative of its transac- 
tions is animated and interesting. A just tribute is paid to 
the memory of Berenger, for opposing the doctrine of tran- 
substantiation, not yet universally received in the western 
church ; but the author betrays his ignorance of the Aristote- 
lian philosophy, when he says it was ridiculous to attempt, 
by means of it, to defend so monstrous an absurdity. The 
Aristotelian division of body into matter and form^ which 
may exist separately^ is admirably fitted for the support of 
transubstantiation ; and we have often been tempted to be- 
lieve, that, on this account, and on this only, the philoso- 
phy of the Lyceum was in the middle ages so generally pre- 
ferred to that of the Academy, The consequences here 
attributed to the prevalence of monkery certainly sprung 
from that system ; but, for the credit of the Albigenses, 
we hope that they were not a spawn of the Paulinians* 

The history of the twelfth century exhibits nothing very 
different from that which prevailed in the preceding. The 
crusades were carried on with disgrace to the arms of 
Christian Europe ; new contests arose between the Empe- 
ror and the Pope ; the northern powers continued to con- 
vert their Pagan subjects and neighbours by the sword; 
and the most ridiculous questions were debated among the 
monks v/ith the utmost keenness. This, however, kept 
inquiry alive, and sent the lover of truth to the sacred scrip- 
tures and the earliest uninspired writers of the church. 

Hence much gospel truth was brought to light ; and the 
Waldenses^ of whom our author gives a just account, got a 
firm footing in various countries of Europe. In this century 
were founded several universities, though the Christians 
were still indebted, for what knowledge they obtained of 
the most useful sciences, to the Saracens j and a copy of the 



' - * ^ 

38S Review of Haweis^ Church History* 

pandects being discovered, suggested to the Pope the ex- 
pedient of digesting under similar heads the various canons 
and decrees published at different periods by councils and 
pontiffs. Hence the origin of the canon law^ which being 
conjoined with the civile was taught as a science in the uni- 
versities, and gave rise to the degrees of L. L. B. and L. 
L. D. at that period, or soon afterwards, the most highly 
valued of all academical honours, because the reward of 
the science employed with most success in support of papal 
usurpation.^ 

The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries present id ti^ 
scenes in all respects similar to those which we have viewed 
in the preceding. Crusades in Palestine and Egypt against 
the followers of Mohammed, and in Eur6ije against the 
Albigenses ; contests between the Pope and the Emperor, 
and between his holiness and the French King ; schisms in 
the papacy producing anathemas from Pope against Pope 5 
the rise of dominician and franciscan orders of monks ; the 
tidiculous disputes among the franciscans themselves ; and 
the devotion of the liionks of all orders to the court of 
Rome, are here placed before us in glowing colours. This 
part of the work is extremely well written, and not dis- 
graced by our author's usual illiberality to those who think 
differently from himself respecting the distinguishing dog- 
mas of Calvin^ He shows that the disputes among the 
monks contributed much to the rise of the Lollards on the* 
continent, while they stimulated our countryman Wickliff 
to search in the scriptures for that truth which he could 
not find in the schools; We have likewise some account 
of the missions to Tartary and China, and of the stop put 
to the progress of Christianity in the eastj by the victorious 
arnls of the bigotted Tamerlane* 

* It was, perhaps, the discovery of this fact that induced our Pro- 
lestant historian, kfter he had inadvertently taken the degree of L. L. 
B. to proceed to Doctor in Physic; a process certainly uncommon among 
clergymen, or men of general literature. 



Review of Haweis' Church History, 3^9 

But we hasten to the fifteenth century, of which the his- 
tory, in the work before us, opens with the fall of the East- 
cm Empire, the discovery of the new world, and the ef- 
fects of those great events on the progress of letters and 
Christianity. At the beginning of this sera, there were no 
fewer than three Popes, each claiming the sovereignty of 
the visible church, and denouncing anathemas against the 
anti -popes and their various adherents, as well nations as 
individuals. To put an end to this confusion, the council of 
Constance was called, which deposed two of the Popes j 
and, the third giving in his resignation, a new Pope was 
chosen, who, by the name of 3Iartin the fifth, assumed 
the ecclesiastical supremacy over the western world. The 
Greek church, though prostrate in the dust, still maintained ^ 
as at this day she maintains, her independence of the see 
of Rome, acknowledging no visible superior to her own 
patriarchs. The principal transactions of the council of 
Constance were the condemnation of John Huss and Je- 
rome of Prague to the flames, in direct violation of the 
promise given to the former of these tnartyrs by the Empe- 
ror Sigisniund ; the ordering of the bones of WicklifF to be 
dug up and burnt ; and the decree for withholding the sa- 
cramental cup from the laity. Another council was called, 
during this century^ at Pavia, which deposed Pope Euge- 
nius ; and the schisms and dissentions which this occa- 
sioned, paved the way for the reformation. 

We have accompanied this impartial historian through 
1500 years of the Christian church, and have now arrived 
with him at the sera of the reformation. Being as little 
attached to popery and its corruptions, as any chaplain of 
the late Countess of Huntingdon can be, we agree with 
' Dr. Haweis that it is an important sera — -even the sera of 
the revival of genuine Christianity^ Our zeal, however, 
does not prompt us, as his zeal has prompted him, to plead 
for the immaculate purity of the motives by which the 
earliest reformers were influenced in every stage of their 



S§0 Review of HatOeis' Church Htsforgi 

controversy with the church and court of Rome. We cer- 
tainly believe that " Luther, in his faint opposition to the 
corruptions of the age, was animated not by zeal for truth, 
but either by avarice or by mean envy for the glory of his 
order neglected by a preference of the Dominicans ;" and 
yet, if bur author include us among those " popish adver- 
saries or infidel historians, to whom, he says, thalignity 
and hatred of gospel-truth suggested this opinion," we 
hesitate not to say to hiivcb—^Mentiris impudentissime. We 
are so far from being ashamed of receiving benefit from 
such men as Martin Luther and Henry the eighth, that we 
bless the hand which turned the avarice of the one, and 
the luxur)' of the other, from their natural mischiefs, to 
become instruments of the choicest blessings— even the re- 
covery of LETTERS, and the restoration of religion. But 
we are not surprised that Erasmus, though he saw the 
errors of the church more clearly than Luther himself, 
*' trembled at the rude hand of hasty reform j" nor does 
our charity, notwithstanding his modest expression, permit 
us to say that it was only the cowardice of his own spirit 
which made him fear " to be involved in the dangers that 
he apprehended." Such sentences can proceed only from 
the mouths and pens of Calvinists, who affect to be 
searchers of hearts and discovers of spirits. 

Dr. Haweis draws an amiable, and, in general, a just 
character of Melancthon ; though he says, that " the yield- 
ing temper of that reformer, his love of peace, and some 
educational prejudices respecting church unity and schism^ 
led him sometimes into concessions injurious to the cause 
which he defended." 

We have seen that, in our author's opinion, schism is n® 
sin, and church unity unworthy of the regard of a spiritu- 
ally-minded man; but Melancthon thought otherwise—^ 
" Would to heaven, (says he) that I could not only not 
enfeeble the power of bishops, but establish their dominion / 
for I see but too well, what sort of church we are likely to 



Review of Haweis* Church History, 391 

Jfeve, if we demolish ecclesiastical government: I am, 
sure that the tyranny we have escaped (viz. that of Rome) 
will then be nothing to that which we shall see established."* 

This, however, is not the only educational prejudice 
which our impartial historian undoubtedly finds in the 
writings of Melancthon. That great and good man was 
no Cahinist^ as appears as well from his Letter to Arch- 
bishop Cranmer, as from what he teaches, in the Augsburg 
Confession, concerning the promise of grace, and justifica- 
tion. In the Letter he says, " Nimis horridae fuerunt 
initio stoicce disputationes apud nostras defato^ et disciplinae 
uocuerunt. Quare te rogo, ut de tali aliqua formula doctrines 
cogitas." In the Confession he thus expresses himself: 
" Non est hie opus disputationibus de prsedestinatione aut 
similibus. NsLin promissio est universalis ; et nihil detrahit 
©peribus, imo exsuscitat ad fidem, et vere bona opera." 

Such offences as these are not to be forgiven by our 
orthodox historian, who yet, strange to tell, speaks of Zu- 
inglius in terms of the highest respect. " Though not 
alike famed with Luther, he may justly (says our author) 
rank his equal in piety, in learning his superior." Would 
the reader, after this, suppose that on free-will^ grace^ eke- 
tion^ and reprobation^ Zuinglius held opinions little different 
from those of Pelagius on the same subjects ? We men^ 
tion not his mean notions of the sacrament of the Lord's 
Supper, or his making the church the creature of the state. 
In the former of these opinions, Dr. Haweis probably agrees 
with him ; and though he himself makes the church the 
creature of the mob^ we are not surprised at his preferring 
Erastionism to Apostolical authority. But, in the name of 
consistency, how comes he to praise the reformer, who 
maintained that heaven is open to all who live according 
to the light vouchsafed to them ; and who seem not to have 
l>elieved in original sin P To talk of the " moderate tem- 

* Seward's Anecdotes, vcl. iil p. 129. 



392 Review of Haxvets* Church History^ 

per and self-command" of Zuinglius, would be ridiculous in 
any man who knows that he put off the character of a cler- 
gyman to assume that of a soldier, and died fighting for his 
opinions against the Cantons, whom he had not been able, 
by reasoning, to convert to the protestant faith ; but of the 
particulars of this fact our diligent and impartial historian 
must be supposed ignorant. He is not ignorant, however, 
that Zuinglius and Luther differed widely in their opinions 
respecting the Lord?s Supper^ which, he says, " is a subject 
unworthy of contest;" and, apologizing for them, he 
requests us to " remember that the best of men are but men 
dt the bestf^ 

His praises of Calvin are not much higher than we 
expected from him ; yet an historian truly impartial, after 
observing that this far-famed reformer " embraced the 
doctrines of truth, and adorned them by a conversation 
the most exemplary^'' would have related, with due horror, 
the burning of Servetus at a stake, instead of slurring 
Calvin's guilt with—." If this ivere a just charge, let the, 
reproach rest upon him !" When he passed this feeble 
censure on the apostle of Geneva, he had surely forgotten 
his own maxim, that " no man ought to vindicate, or, as 
he might have added, extenuate, abuses in the cause of 
protestantism, whilst he pleads against them in the hand of 
popery." 

Notwithstanding these effusions of prejudice and partialis 
^, he gives a rapid and well written sketch of tlie progress 
of the reformation in Germany, France, Switzerland, Swe- 
den, Denmark, and Norway ; and then proceeds to state the 
doctrines of the reformation, and to contend, in direct op- 
position to what he had before related of the contests of 
Luther, Carlestadt, and Zuinglius, for a union ofsentimen^ 
among the reformers ! 

What he calls the doctrines of the reformation are the 
peculiar opinions of Calvin and his more rigid adherents^ 
>vhich, of course, we must suppose are all that he deeins 



Mevtexv of Haxveis* Church History. SQ3 

necessary to be received by the Romish Church to restore 
her to primitive purity. The condemnation of image- 
worship, of transubstantiation, of the invocation of saints j 
ihe denial of purgatory and of the supremacy of the Pope ; 
and the restoration of the cup to the laity in communion, 
a« well as of the privilege of marriage to the clergy, are 
aot deemed worthy of notice among the doctrines which 
the first reformers unanimously maintained ! The funda- 
mental truths, in which all the eminent men among them 
concurred, were only 

" 1. Of God's eternal purpose and predestination of an 
elect people^ and those, comparatively ^w, ordained to life 
and glory eternal. 2. That man had lost all ability to do 
good^ and freedom of will to choose it ; and was in his 
aature, as fallen, inclined only to evil. 3. That nothing 
ever did or can alter this propensity of the human heart, 
but the Holy Ghost by his own immediate agency on the 
souls of men. 4. That a sinner is, and can he justified by 
faith only; and this not of himself, being unable either to 
comprehend or receive the things that be of the Spirit of 
Godi and therefore, the faith itself must be the gift of 
God, 5. That merit in creatures there is none nor ever cam 
be. From first to last a sinner must be saved by grace. 
6. That the vicarious atonement by the one oblation of 
Christ upon the Cross is effectual, not for the many called^ 
but for ^^few chosenP 

Were we less acquainted than we are with the principles 
and views of Dr. Haweis, we should indeed be surprised 
by his hardy assertion, that " these are the things which the 
reformers uniformly held ;'' whilst he passes, without 
notice, so many other things, about which all Europe 
knows that there was no controversy among them. But, 
how does he prove the unanimity of the reformers in hold- 
ing these abstruse dogmas of Calvinism ? Why, as usual, 
by his own confident assertions, and by partial extracts 
from the correspondence of Luther with Erasmus ! 

50 



'o. 



94f R^iew of Haw'ets^ Church Hi'story-. 



Melancthon's sentiments respecting predestination and 
election we have already exhibited in his own words,' to 
which it is hoped that all our readers, who have not been 
chaplains to the late Countess of Huntingdon, will give as 
much credit as to the unsupported assertion of our impartial 
historian. The sentiments of Zuinglius respecting these 
subjects may be safely inferred from the following address 
of the minister to the godfathers and godmothers of chil- 
dren brought to be baptized, which the reader will find in 
the Liturgy of the Church of Zurich, of which Zuinglius 
was the founder :— " Consider, therefore, that it is the 
will of God our Saviour, that all men should attain unto 
the knowledge of his will, through our only Mediator 
Jesus Christ, who gave himself up for the redemption of 
ALL MANKIND."* Is this Calvinism, or what our author 
calls gospel truth ? 

The quotation from Luther proves, indeed, that he held 
the most shocking of the tenets which have usually been 
attributed to Calvin as their author ; but it proves, at the 
same time, that, in controversy, he substituted petulance for 
'argument, and scrupled not to pervert the meaning of scrip- 
ture to support his cause. Erasmus had said — " What can 
be more useless, than to publish this paradox to the world ? 
namely, that whatever we do, is done, not by virtue of our 
cwnfree zvill^ but in a way of necessity^'''' &c. To this very 
pertinent question, Luther, after a number of sarcasms, 
which the respect due to learning, genius, and virtue, should 
have suppressed, replies ; " You urge, where is either the 
necessity or utility of preaching predestination? God him- 
self teaches it, and commands us to teach it, and that is 
answer sufficient." 

True ! if God command us to teach it, no other answer 
could be required by Erasmus, or will be required by any 
one of those Churches, in which Dr. Haweis says, that" the 

* Liturgia Figurina, London, 1693. 



Sevietv of iTaxveis* Church History* 395 

doctrines of the reformation have gone out of vogue :" But 
where is this command to be found ? 

Predestination, we shall suppose to be an undoubted 
truth ; but we find no mention of it in the Gospels nor in 
the Acts of the Apostles ; and we hardly think that even 
the zeal of our author will contend, that in these five in- 
spired tracts, all the truths are not to be found, which our 
blessed Lord commanded his followers to teach, when he 
said to the eleven, " Go ye into all the world, and preach 
the gospel to eiiery creature. He that believeth and is bap- 
tized, shall be saved ; and he that believeth not, shall be 
damned." The controversies of St. Paul with the Jews and 
Greek philosophers, led him into disquisitions on many to- 
pics, to which Christians might for ever have safely re- 
mained strangers ; and which illiterate Christians can ne- 
ver, comprehend. Let not the reader be startled at this asr 
sertion. For the character and labours of St. Paul we have 
the highest veneration, and believe the world to be more 
indebted to him, than to any other individual minister of 
Christ ; but even St. Peter, though he did not presume, like 
our author, to charge the Apostle of the Gentiles with 
temporizings yet acknowledged, that, *' in his epistles are 
some things hard to be understood, which they who are 
unlearned and unstable, wrest to their own destruction." 

The case, indeed, could not be otherwise. St. Paul's 
epistles are, every one of them, addressed to particular 
churches, or particular men, for the obvious purpose of 
guarding them against some prevailing errors, and unra- 
velling the sophistry of the Jews, the Gnostics, the Stoics, 
and the Epicureans. This being the case, no man can feel 
the full force of his reasonings, or apprehend the precise 
meaning of the terms which he uses, who has not some 
knowledge of the questions that were agitated among those 
to whom his epistles were immediately addressed. Such 
knowledge can never be. the portion of illiterate. Chris- 
tians, who shall therefore be saved, if they believe the pi .in 
truths, and fulfil the duties inculcated in tlie four gospels ; 



3§6 Ri^i&U) of Haweis^ Church History, 

though they pef plex not themselves with the things in St# 
Paul's epistles, which St. Peter himself thought hard to be 
Understood. 

In the gospels, then, must we lo6k for the command 
Which Luther says, God has given us to teach ignorant 
men, that " whatever they do, is done, not by virtue of their 
own free will, but in a Way of necessity," Instead of such a 
command, however, he produces only two passages, which, 
as they contain no command of any kind, are nothing to the 
purpose* The former, in which our blessed Lord says,* 
** Many are called, but few are chosen," refers obviously t6 
"the calling of the Jews by the first preaching of the gospel j 
and the latterf is only a declaration that Christ knew the 
temper and disposition of those whom he had called to the 
apostleship. After telling the twelve that they " were not 
all clean," and setting them an example of condescension 
^nd humility, he adds, " If ye know these things^ happy 
are ye, if ye do them. I speak not of you all, I know whom 
J ha^ve chosen : but that the Scripture might be fulfilled, he 
that eateth bread with me, hath lift up his heel against me." 
If these words could be supposed to have any relation what- 
ever to the doctrine of election and reprobation, (which they 
plainly have not), they would operate with the force of de- 
monstration against that doctrine ; for they declare that 
Judas was chosen as well as St. Peter. 

Aware that his illustrious correspondent would not re- 
ceive these two texts of scripture, as the command of God to 
■teach that what we do, is done, not by virtue of our own free 
will, hxxtm a way of necessity, Luther at last condescends 
to point out to him the utility of the doctrine : " It tends, 
he says, to humble our pride !" 

Does it indeed ? Are the Calvinists, in general, the hum- 
blest of mortals ? Or does this impartial history indicate the 
extreme humility of its author ? Surely the man who pro- 
nounces that all the Catholic writers of the first four centu= 

* Matt. XX. 16. t St. John xiii. 1*. 



Review of HawM Church History m 397 

lies arc either weak or wicked, and that all the modems 
who think not on these subjects as he does, are " destitute 
of learning, not to say common sense," has no pretensions 
whatever to humility. Indeed, it is not easy to conceive how 
the belief of unconditional election and reprobation can pos- 
sibly humble the human heart ; for, as it is natural for him 
who is convinced that he is one of the chosen few, to look 
down with contempt on the less favoured multitude ; so he 
who believes, that whatever he does, is done by necessity, 
may indeed, as our Church teaches,* " be thrust either into 
desperation, or into wretchedness of unclean living;" but 
he cannot be humbled by the consciousness of guilty be- 
cause, though a murderer, he was as passive an instrument 
as the sword by which he perpetrated the deed. By the 
inward operation of divine grace, the elected Calvinist may 
indeed be kept humble ; but, by the same operation, the 
virtuous remonstrant may likewise be kept humble ; espe- 
cially as he is conscious that all his sins are chargeable on 
himself. 

But the reformer adds another reason to prove the utility 
of this doctrine. 

" It is one of the highest degrees of faith, he says, sted- 
fastly to believe that God is infinitely merciful, though he 
saves, comparatively, but few, and condemns so many ; and 
that he is strictly just, though of his own will he makes 
such numbers of mankind necessarily liable to damnation. 
These are some of the unseen things, whereof faith is the 
evidence. Whereas, were it in my power to comprehend 
them, or clearly to make out how God is both inviolably 
just, and infinitely merciful, notwithstanding the display of 
wrath, and seeming inequality in his dispensations, respec- 
ing the reprobate, faith would have little or nothing to do." 

And this jargon Dr. Haweis calls a *' triumphant reply T' 
forgetting, it is to be hoped, that God himself appeals to 

. * trth Avtide. 



S^Z Remeto of. Haxuels* Church History, , 

human judgment for the equity of his ways, which he surely 
would not have done, if divine justice had been altogether 
incomprehensible by man. In the first chapter of Isaiah's 
prophecies, he calls upon the Jews to reason with him on the 
subject, and, by the mouth of Ezekiel, thus addresses them: 
*' Yet ye say, the way of the Lord is not equal. Hear 
now, O house of Israel! Is not my way equal? are not your 
ways unequal ?" A question, which the house of Israel 
could not have answered, were there any truth in this rea- 
soning of Luther's. 

Let not the reader be scandalized at the freedom with 
which we treat the dogmas and reasonings of this great 
reformer. To use the language of a celebrated historian,^ 
*' The knowledge of truth was not poured into his mind all 
at once, by any special revelation : he acquired it by in- 
dustry and meditation, and his progress, of consequence, 
was gradual." He was liable, therefore, to all the mistakes 
of other students ; and was destitute of many aids, which 
we now possess, for the discovery of religious truth. Whilst 
the irascibility of his own temper, resenting the ill treat- 
ment which he received from the church of Rome, drove 
him, perhaps, too far from the creed of that church in some 
points of doctrine, the inveterate prejudices of education 
made him symbolize too much with her in others ; and be 
it remembered, that, if he thought " the truths respecting 
predestination in all its branches, should be taught and pub- 
lished^^ the reformers of our own church were of a very 
different opinion ;'[' and that if deference be due to human 
authority, it is to them^ and not to Luther, that xve are to 
pay it. 

From this digression respecting the union of sentiments 
among the most eminent reformers, the author returns to 
the history of the church. His detail of ecclesiastical aifairs^ 

* Robertson* s History of Charles V. 

t See the conclusion of the liTth Article. * 



Heoiew of Haxveis* Church History. 37^ 

from the diet of Augsburg, to the religious peace in the 
same city, is not sufficiently minute; and he has produced no 
good authority for his belief, that the Emperor Charles the 
fifth died in the protestant faith. The superstitious mumme- 
ries of that monarch, at the end of his life, are indeed alto- 
gether inconsistent with the supposition ; and Dr. Haweis 
might have found, in the spirit and temper of Philip, a suf- 
ficient reason for the cruel treatment of Charles's friends 
and confessor, without supposing that a Romish priest and 
Romish bishop countenanced the apostacy of the Emperor 
from the Romish faith ! With Robertson, however, we 
think it is not improbable, that Charles, " having found, af- 
ter repeated trials, that he could not bring any two clocks 
or watches to go exactly alike, might reflect, with a mixture 
of surprize as well as regret, on his own folly, in having 
bestowed so much time and labour on the mere vain at- 
tempt of bringing mankind to a precise uniformity of senti- 
ment concerning the profound and mysterious doctrines of 
religion." This was a reflection worthy of the most saga- 
cious monarch of his age, when, freed from the cares of go- 
vernment, he was at leisure to meditate coolly on the powers, 
passions, and prejudices of the human mind. 
' In the fourth chapter of the book which contains the his- 
tory of the sixteenth century, we have a rapid detail of the 
progress of the reformation in England, Scotland, Ireland, 
Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Brandenburg, Prussia and 
Germany. There is, however, nothing in it to which our 
readers tan be supposed strangers, except a ludicrous story, 
not worthy of repetition, respecting Dr. Cole and the knave 
of clubs ; an erroneous account of the constitution of the first 
reformed church in Scotland ; and an acknowledgment, we 
suppose inadvertently made, that the Augsburg confession 
is not Calvinistic, and, of course, that what was formerly 
said of the Calvinism of Melancthon, is a falsehood ! 

We have more than once, in reviewing this work, had 
occasion to remark, that to the impartiality of an historian, 



400 Review of Haweis^ Church History, 

diligence and accuracy are as essential as the love of truth; 
and, if our learned 2C[id candid author had given himself the 
trouble to read Skinner's Ecclesiastical History; Bishop 
Sage's Fundamental Charter of Presbytery ; or even the ii- 
turgy compiled for the use of the church of Scotland, by 
the reformer Knox, he would hardly have dared to express 
himself in the following terms : 

^' The intrepid Knox having formed with Calvin, at Ge- ■, 
neva, the strictest friendship, and adopted all his opinions 
respecting church government, be returned to his native 
land ; and with his rough eloquence, and hardihood that 
^new no fear, he bore down all opposition, overturned the 
whole Popish hierarchy, and established the Presbyterian 
government in its stead, to which the church of Scotland 
still adheres,^'' 

We pass over the obvious intention to deceive, in the stu- 
died ambiguity of the last clause of this sentence ; and only 
beg leave to refer our spiritually-minded vadxiy to the works 
which we have mentioned, for a complete proof that the 
Presbyterian form of church government was introduced 
into Scodand, not by John Knox, but by Andrew Melville ^ 
and, that for the first fifteen years, the reformed church was 
governed by super intendants^ for the ordination of whom 
John Knox drew up a form* Superintendants, however, 
resemble bishops j and such is our pious priest's unremit- 
ting zeal to excite the rancour of the multitude against that 
order of men, that, speaking of those, who, in the reign of 
our Henry the eighth embraced the " evangelical doctrines," 
he says, 

" Some of them, as the excellent Bilney, by whom Lati- 
mer was converted, with Frith, and other worthies, fell 
victims to episcopal persecution, and died in flames !" 

When you wrote this very extraordinary sentence, {give 
us leave. Sir, to ask you solemnly) what impression did 
J^oii mean to make on the minds of your readers ? You 
knov/ perfecdy well, that the persecutions under the reign 



Review of Hatvets* Church Hisiory* 401 

of Henry, can no more be called episcopal^ than presbyierial 
persecutions ; but do you not likewise know, that your ad- 
mirers—the infatuated frequenters of Lady Huntingdon'is 
chapels— will understand you as here charging bishops of 
every communion with cherishing, in the churches which 
they govern, a spirit of persecution? That the charge is 
Jalse^ a stronger proof cannot be wished for, than that the 
rector of All-Saints^ Aldipinckky has never been censured,, 
either for his schismatical practices at Bath, or for the num- 
berless insinuations of a malicious tendency with which this 
history teems agajnst the regular clergy of the church of 
England, 

We pas§ over the two next chapters, on the learning and 
heresies of the times^ and on the accessions made to the Chris- 
tian Church ; because from them the reader can learn no- 
thing, except that the author, differing widely from Bacon^ 
is of opinion, that " the more advanced in science proceeded 
to the summit of wisdom, to know that there is no GodP^ 

The seventh chapter, on the Progress of the true Churchy 
exhibits a melancholy picture of the religion of those who, 
in the western world, acknowledged the supremacy of the 
Pope, and, in the east, that of the Patriarch of Constan- 
tinople. The author, however, had surely forgotten his own 
definition of gospel doctrines, when, speaking of the Greek 
Christians, he chose to affirm, that " they are tenacious only 
0f their miserable forms and ceremonies, in which all their 
Christianity consists, and strangers alike to the gospel doC' 
trines, and the purity of godliness." According to him, prC' 
destination is the most important of all gospel doctrines ; 
and we learn from Dr. King,* not only that it is a dogma 
of the Greek church, but also that it is treated bv some of 
the Russian clergy, " with a much better kind of logic than 
that with which such points are generally discussed." When 
I)r. Haweis shall have read this, or rather the work to 

* liitcs and Oremoniei of the Greek Church , &c. 



402 Meview of Haweis* Church History* 

which we have referred him, we trust, that his candour wiii 
impel him to make, through the medium of the Russiaa 
Ambassador, a proper apologv to the Archbishop of No- 
vbgorod, for having thus inadvertently calumniated the 
brethren! 

The account of the Lutheran churches is given with less 
partiality than our author usually betrays. It proves with 
the force of demonstration, that the earliest reformers were 
not agreed in holding the doctrine of unconditional election 
and reprobation ; that the followers of Melancthon were, at 
least, as numerous as those of Luther ; and that they were 
prevented from explicitly avowing themselves to be what 
Dr. Haweis calls Semi-pelagians, only during Luther's life, 
lest his irascible temper and overbearing spirit should excite 
such dissentions among them, as might give advantages to 
their common enemies. 

Among the Calvinistic churches enumerated in the same 
chapter, is placed the church of England. As our author 
produces no other proof than his own assertion, that she 
holds the doctrine of absolute decrees, we shall content our- 
selves at present with opposing to it our denial; but when 
he quotes Bishop Burnet, in support of another position 
equally false, the reader may perhaps think him entitled to 
more attention. Speaking of the Puritans in the reign of 
Elizabeth, he says— - 

" Nor were they as averse to the name of bishop or his 
superintendance, as to the pomp, and wealth, and political 
engagements of the prelacy : for as yet the English bishops 
claimed not their office by divine right, but under the con' 
stitution of their country; nor pleaded for TTzore than two 
orders of apostolical appointment, bishops and deacons." 

Has Dr. Haweis never read the Preface to the Form of 
ordaining Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, published, by au- 
thority, in the reign of Edward the sixth ? If not, it is time 
that he should read it ; that he may not again oppose the 
testimony of an individual respecting the docU'ines of the 



Review of Hcrweh^ Church Hktofy. "4t5S 

church, to the authoritative declaration of the church her- 
self. But the declarations of the church are by him gene* 
rally understood in a eense diametrically opposite to the 
literal meaning of the words in which they are made. 

Thus, in the exhortation at the celebration of the commU' 
nion^ the church, by the mouth of the priest, instructs the 
people, that " as the benefit is great, if, with a true penitent 
heart, and lively faith, we receive that holy sacrament (for 
then we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink his 
blood ; then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us ; we are 
one with Christ, and Christ with us ;) so is the danger 
great, if we receive the same unworthily ; for then are we 
guilty of the body arid blood of Christ our Saviour ; we eat 
and drink our own damnation^ not considering the Lord's 
body," &c. But our author, wishing to make the church 
in every thing symbolize with the oracle of Geneva, says— 

" Calvin supposed the sign or symbol to convey a sacra- 
mental pledge of blessing, and that a spiritual presence of 
Christ attended it to the regenerate and believing only; 
whilst to others the elements remained as common food: and 
this the Church of England adopted,"^ Whence it follows, 
that, in his opinion, the Church of England means by the 
word damnation^ bodily nourishment; for we can hardly 
suppose that he really intends, every time that he sits down 
to dinner, literallv to " eat and drink his own damnation^ or 
to be guilty of the body and blood of Christ his Saviour !" 

His account of the rise and progress of the Socinians, In- 
<iependents, and Anabaptists, contains little that is new or 
exceptionable. Mention is, indeed, made of a city^ of 
which we never heard before, called Racow ; and geogra- 
phical information we certainly did not expect from a his- 
tory of the church. We are afraid, however, that, by all 
other historians, civil or ecclesiastical, our author's Racow 
is called Cracow^ or Cracovia; and had he studied with 
care the works of Charles Leslie, he might have learned, 
"with other things of more importance, that the Socinian ca- 



4CM Review of Haweis* Church lltstOfy» 

techism was published in Cracow^ though to avoid a ca^- 
phonie, it is usually called the Racovian catechism. This is 
a trifling blundet, but it shows a defect of that accuracy, 
without which an historian can never be trusted. 

His introduction to the history of the church, in the se- 
venteenth century, raised in our minds expectations which 
the continued narrative did not gratify. The candour with 
whirh he judges of the conduct of the Jesuits, when acting 
as Missionaries in the four quarters of the globe ; the cen- 
sures which he deservedly passes upon the other orders 
which thwarted their measures ; and the disinterested zeal 
by which he allows many of that learned and active order 
to have been influenced, led us to hope for the same impar- 
tiality in his account of the reformed churches, more espe- 
cially of the church of England. We were, however, woe- 
fully disappointed. James the first he ^nd^ popishly inclined, 
and his most respectable bishops impious Jiatterers ; yet the 
church of Rome knew so little of this inclination, that, we 
are told, she meant to blow up the monarch and his bishops 
by gunpowder ! Charles the first leaned still more towards 
Rome, and Archbishop Laud was Haifa Papist ; though the 
Princess Elizabeth has declared to the world, that the last 
injunction laid upon her by her royal father, was to study 
the Archbishop's book against Fisher the Jesuit, which 
would ground her against popery ! 

It is indeed known to all who are acquainted with the 
history of that period, that no man recovered so many per- 
sons from the corruptions of popery as Dr. Laud ; that the 
famous Chillingworth was one of his proselytes j and that, 
of course, it is to that much calumniated prelate, that the 
world is indebted for the ablest defence of the reformation 
that ever was written — we mean Chillingworth's Religion 
of Protestants^ a safe Way to Salvation, The Archbishop 
^as indeed a high -churchman, and discountenanced the 
doctrine of absolute decrees ; and the divine right of episco- 
pacy, with the universality of redemption, are, in our an- 



l^eview of Haweis* Church History* 40S 

thorns opinion, the two greatest heresies that can be main- 
tained by a Protestant, whether clergyman or layman. They 
are much greater offences against God than impiety and hy^ 
pocrisy ; for, " he hopes that Whitgift and Bancroft were 
g^ood 7nen^ and good bishops," though, in the page immedi- 
ately preceding that in which this hope is expressed, he had 
called the former an impious flatter er^ and the latter, a hy' 
pocrite I (vol. iii. pp. 80, 81.) 

What he says, (p. 62) of Calixtus, the divinity professor 
of Helmstadt, is much more applicable to Laud :— -" No 
man appears a more determined Protestant than Laud, or 
has written with greater force against the errors of the 
church of Rome ; though he was abused as half a Catholic, 
because he maintained, that in the church of Rome thefun* 
damental articles were still held ; and that salvation might 
there be obtained, even though men were under many mis- 
takes and prejudices of education. He admitted that the 
union of churches was impracticable, imder the decisions of 
the council of Trent ;" but earnestly wished that those de- 
cisions might be altered, and Rome become such as that he 
could unite with her. This surely was no unpardonable of^ 
fence in the disciple of him, who, in one of his best prayers 
on earth, said, " Holy Father, keep through thine own name 
those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we 
areP 

Dr. H. does not think Cromwell just equal to Charles the 
first in moral worth ; but " the true religion," i. e. Calvin- 
ism, " was infinitely more indebted to him !" Nay, we are 
as hiuch indebted to him {or preserving true religion among 
us, as to Henry the eighth for introducing it ! Was true re- 
ligion then preserved among us by the Brownists, Muggk' 
tonians^ ^uakerSy Fifth-monarchy --771671, and all the other 
sects without name and number, which sprang up under the 
protectorate, and are now mostly forgotten ? A spirituaUy- 
minded man, who, preferring the schism-shop to the cathe- 
dral, wishes, by all possible means, to lessen episcopal au- 



406 Review of Haweis* Church History. 

thority, may be of this opinion ; but we trust that the ma- 
jority of the nation think differently of true religion. 

With respect to the character of Charles the second, we are 
not inclined to dispute with him ; but we cannot enough ad- 
anire the effrontery of the man, who affirms that the Bishops 
and other dignitaries of the church were in that reign igno- 
rant, worldly-minded, and negligent of their duty ! Were 
the Archbishops Juxon, Shelden, and Sancroft ignorant, or 
worldly-minded men I He admits some merit in Kenn^ even 
though an Arminian ; and be it recorded to the honour 
of Charles, that Dr. Kenn recommended himself to his fa- 
vour, not by flattering his vices, but by reproving his mis- 
tress' — ^the famous Nell Gwyn. Warburton, though, in our 
author's opinion, no better a Christian than Julian the apos- 
tate, was probably as learned as Dr. Haweis ; and, as he 
was no high-churchman, he may be entitled to credit, when 
he affirms of the reign of Charles the second, not only that 
*^' it was\ biit is, likely ever to be esteemed our golden age of 
theological literature." 

Our author, who finds not one unsullied virtue in the so- 
vereigns of the house of Stuart, discovers great generositif 
in William, Prince of Orange, when he condescended to ac- 
cept of three kingdoms ! Magnanimous hero ! He was not 
actuated by low ambition, or a desire to humble the French 
king. His only motive for deigning to snatch the sceptre 
from the hands of his uncle and father-in-law, was a desire 
to preserve the profession of the true rehgion in Great- Bri- 
tain and Ireland ! How opportunely was he seized with that 
Christian desire immediately after the birth of the Prince 
of Wales ; — an event which opened his eyes likewise to 
another fact, which he could not previously be made to per- 
ceive / James, and his brother Charles, had been often ac- 
cused of extending the prerogative, and encroaching on the 
rights of the people, and the parliament; but William, as 
long as he was heir-apparent to the throne, saw no necessity 
for restraining the prerogative. He even said to Charles, 



Review of Haweis* Church History, 40j? 

that it ought not to be restrained ; but he now discovered his 
mistake, and came over to England, not merely to prevent 
the establishment of popery, but to redress all the grievan- 
ces of the nation ! Yet William was not a faultless sove- 
reign. He filled the vacant sees with latitudinarian divines^ 
favouring Arminianismy and some of them even high- 
churchmen ! 

Our learned historian, however, is mistaken, when he 
says that the prelates, who could not transfer their allegiance 
to him from the abdicated Sovereign, were deposed. No 
attempt was made to depose them, if by deposition he meant 
degradation. They were, indeed, deprived of their sees by 
an act of Parliament; but deprivation of a see, and deposi- 
tion or degradation^ are words of very different import, 
though Sir Richard Hall and he have chosen to confound 
them. A schism, it is true, was, by this rash measure, 
introduced even among high-churchmen ; but Sancroft and 
Tillotson were both bishops, and the adherents of neither 
looked upon the ordination of the other as invalid: they 
followed the example of the council of Nice, which ac-? 
knowledged the validity of the Novetian ordinations, though 
unquestionably schismatical ; and when a clergyman went 
over from the one party to the other, he was not re-ordained, 
but only required to renounce the principles upon which the 
schism was founded. Our reverend physician's insinua- 
tions, therefore, that the authority of the regular clergy is 
not more apostolical than that of the self-commissioned 
methodists, proceeding, like those of his precursor the 
Baronet, on a confusion of ideas, serve only to evince how 
little he is acquainted with the constitution of the Catholic 
church, and how desirous he is to promote fanaticism and 
endless divisions. 

The history of the eighteenth century opens with a high 
panegyric by the author on himself ; and the object of the 
detail is to prove that th^re is no true Christianity in the 
world, but among the Moravians^ the Me^hodists^ the Ger- 



408 Review of HaweiiP Church History, 

snan Pietists^ and the various sects of Scottish Seceders^ who 
are, indeed, such genuine gospellers^ that they have pub- 
licly renounced some of the first principles of moral recti-^ 
tude.* The Lutheran churches have all deviated from the 
opinions of their founder respecting j&«r if ia^/ar redemption 
and absolute decrees ; and Dr. Haweis, who holds these opi- 
nions, has too good reason to value his own understanding 
and progress in godliness, to look upon their universal apos- 
tacy as a ground of probability^ if tiot a proof that Luther, 
^n these points, had not discovered the truth as it is in 
Jesus ! 

Much undeserved abuse, we believe, has been poiwed 
opon the Moravians ; but we cannot pay great regard to 
our author's account of their church and doctrines, because 
it omits several things of importance to be known, and con-* 
tains some assertions, which we have good reason to consi- 
der as false. An episcopal succession is indeed a matter of 
too little importance to be noticed by our spiritually -minded 
man ; but there are readers of our journal, who will receive 
pleasure from the information that Archbishop Potter, after 
the most diligent research into the history of the church of 
the united brethren, admitted the succession of their bishops 
to have been uninterrupted, and considered them as a so- 
ciety of Christians deserving of the right hand of fellowship. 
Our author affirms, that Count ZinzendorfF, " though he 
Consented, with Baron Watteville, to be appointed to the 
presidence of the brethren's affairs, both spiritual and tern* 
poral, in conjunction with the elders of the congregation, 
yet continued in communion v/ith the Luthem church to 
his dying day !" 

This is a tale, in itself, exceedingly improbable. Th& 
united brethren, at that period, if not now, considered epis- 
copal ordination as necessary to qualify the servants of the 
church for their respective functions ,: and it is little Jikely 

* See 0i5r eighth volume^ p. 134. 



Review of HaweW Church Hhtory, 409 

that diey would appoint a lavman of a different communion 
to preside over their bishops and presbyters. But we need 
not reason in this manner. We have the authority of one 
of their own clergy to affirm, that Count Zinzendorff, 
after endeavouring in vain to bring over the brethren at 
Hernheet to the Lutheran faith and discipline, became 
himself a convert to their faith and discipline, and, in 1735, 
was consecrated one of their bishops ; having, the year be- 
fore, been examined, and admitted into the inferior orders 
by the theological faculty at Tubingen. Archbishop Potter, 
we are assured, congratulated him on the event, and pro- 
mised what assistance he could give to a church of confes- 
sors, of whom he wrote in terms of the highest respect, for 
their having maintained the pure and primitive faith an4 
discipline, in the nqiidst of the naost tedious and cruel per- 
secutions. 

We have reason to believe, from the detail given us by 
the same candid Moravian, that the charge of impurity 
brought against the count by the translator of Mosheim'ij 
history, and the Bishops Warburton and Lavington, is not 
so totally groundless as our author wishes to persuade his 
readers. The count, indeed, was innocent ; but it is ad- 
mitted by our correspondent, that some of the converts to 
the faith and discipline of the unitas fratrum^ having pre- 
viously imbibed extravagant notions, propagated them widi 
zeal among their new friends, in a phraseology extremely 
reprehensible; and that the count himself sometimes adopted 
the very improper language of those fanatics, when labour- 
ing to bring them from the extravagance of error to the 
soberness of truth. It is added, that much of the extra- 
vagance and error, which have been attributed to the count, 
is to be charged, not to /zzm, but to those persons who, 
writing his extempore sermons in short-hand, printed and 
published them without his knowledge or consent. 

This account of the matter is extremely probable ; and 
while it may serve to vindicate these respectable charactejr^ 



410 Revieio of Haweis^ Church JUstori/. 

from one of the blackest calumnies that were ever circu- 
lated against meri,^ it shows that Count ZinzendorfF and 
the brethren gave no countenance to those impurities, 
which, on plausible evidence, were said to disgrace their 
society. They have departed, however, far from the ori- 
ginal puritv of their principles, if they be amalgamated 
with that mass of mushrooms sprung from thd hot-bed o£ 
fanaticism, arid ycleped the Missionarif Society* 

The three apdsdes of methodism were Mr. John Wes- 
ley, Mr. George Whitfield, and " the noble and elect 
Lady Huntingdon." We have a full account of the birth, 
life, and transactions of each of these servants of the Lord, 
and revivers of true godliness ; and it may seem rather sin- 
gular, that, though Wesley was as zealous an opponent of 
Calvinism as any of those dignitaries of the church, whom 
our author calls Semi-pelagians, he is yet admitted to have 
been " an eminentlv favoured saint of God." But he had 
the iaaerit of exciting a schism in the established church, 
which, like charity, covereth a multitude of sins. 

Whitfield had all Wesley's zeal, with the additional me- 
rit of Calvinistic orthoxy, and little learning / Hence it 
is, that " no man^ since the days of St. Paul, not even Lu- 
ther himself, was ever personally blest to the call and con- 
version of so many souls from darkness to light, and from 
the power of Satan untd God, as George Whitfield. He 



* ** I am informed," says our candid author, *♦ that the impure and 
inalignant note inserted by the translator of Moshelm, against the 
brethren, in his eeclesiast'cal history, he would, from conviction of its in- 
justice, have expunged : but the coijy being shown to the author of the, 
divine Legation of Moses, the bishop engaged him to let it stand, and 
there it remains a monument of the bitterness, bigotry, and falsehood of 
these accusers of the brethren " It would have been singularly obliging 
in our impartial historian, to have said^o/n v!?jom he received this curi- 
ous piece of information ! The bishop of Gloucester and Dr. Maclaine 
were no fools. They could not but be sensible that, if real, this was ti 
most nefarious transaction ; and it is not probable that they .would first 
commit a crime, and then publish that crime to defeat its •bject, and di: - 
grace thctnsdves ,' 



Review of ffaweis* Church History, 411 

crossed the Atlantic thirteen times, to preach the everlast- 
ing gospel, with the power of the Holy Ghost sent down from 
Heaven /" 

But though no man^ since the days of St, Paul^ has been 
so personally blest as St. George Whitfield^ yet the elect lady 
seems to have been still more blest ; for she founded col- 
leges, endowed innumerable chapels, and patronized Dr* 
Haweis ! There are several curious particulars in our au- 
thor's account of this lady, which we regret that our limits 
permit us not to transcribe ; but we cannot omit the follow- 
ing, as it shows the real oh]^ct of some of the Methodists 
in " creeping into houses, and leading captive silly women, 
led away by divers lusts," whilst it verifies an observation 
of the pious Nelson, that " love between the sexes, though 
it may begin in the spirit, generally ends in the flesh." 

Lady Huntingdon, though exemplary in her conduct 
from a child, wished, till some time after her marriage, to 
establish her own righteousness, and " by prayer, fasting, 
and alms-deeds, to commend herself to the favour of the 
Most High and Most Holy ! The zealous preachers, who 
had been branded with the name of Methodists, had now 
awakened great attention in the land. Lcidy Margaret Hast- 
ings happening to hear them, received the truth as it is in 
Jesus from their ministry ; and was, some years after, 
united in marriae'e with the excellent Mr. Ingham^ one of 
the first labourers in this plenteous harvest ! Conversing 
•with Lady Margaret one day on this subject^ Lady Hun- 
tingdon was exceedingly struck with a sentiment she ut- 
tered, that since she had knoion and believed in the Lord 
yesus Christ for life and salvation^ she had been as happy 
as an angelic To any such seiisation of happiness, Lady 
Huntingdon felt that she was yet a stranger !" She obtained 
that happiness, however, from her connection with Mr. 
Whitfield, and prophesied to Bishop Benson, that, on his 
death-bed, " the ordination of George Whitfi "Id would be 
one of the fev^^ ordinations on which he would reflect v/itli 



412 Reviexo of Haweis^ Church Htstoftf, 

complacence."— i" It is worthy of remark," adds the author^ 
*' that Bishop Benson, on his dying bed, sent ten guineas 
to Mr. Whitfield, as a token of his favour and approbation, 
and begged to be remembered by him in his prayers !" 

Yet this prophetess, this genuine Calvinist, this elect ladif.^ 
1^ represented by her panegyrist, as having her heart swollen 
with spiritual pride, as " thinking of herself much more 
highly than she ought to have thought, and not soberly, 
according as God had dealt to her and her friends the mea- 
sure of faith."^ " The success attending her efforts seemed 
to impress her mind with a persuasion, that a particular 
benediction would rest upbn whomsoever she should send 
forth s^ and rendered her choice not always judicious ! She 
had so long directed the procedures of her connection^ that 
she too seldom asked the advice of the judicious ministers 
who laboured with her ; and bore not passively contradic- 
tion?'* This, we suppose, is related to prove the truth of 
Luther's opinion, that Calvinism tends to humble the 
human heart ; and many such proofs the reader will find 
in our author's account of himself, and his brethren of the 
connection ! 

Thus, " Whitfield too frequently indulged in censures of 
the clergy, which, however just they might be, seemed the 
effect of resentment !"~™^' He, and Wesley, and all of them, 
were always at their work, preaching wherever they could 
procure admittance into the churches ; and not a little flat- 
tered by the popularity attending their ministrations ! They 
must have been more than men (they were the elect) if they 
had not been so." " The Methodists" (remember, reader, 
he is a Methodist who is speaking) " live in a state of 
greater piety and separation f om the zvorld xkmn the gene-* 
rality of their brethren. They join in none of the fashion- 



* Rom. xli. 5. 

f We now see the propriety of our author's phrase, " Episcopal menj'' 
which appeared to us so strange when ^xe first met with it. 



Review of Hawets* Church History. 315 

able amusements of the age, frequent not the theatres, oi? 
scenes of dissipation, court no favour of the great, or human 
respects ; their ttjne and fservices are better employed in the 
more important labours of the ministry, preaching the word 
in season, out of season, and counting' their work their best 
wages P^ 

We have some reason to believe that all Calvinistic Me*- 
thodists have not been so disinterested. One of them, said 
to be of the elect lady's connection^ agreed to hold a rich 
rectory for a minor, but refused to resign it when the minor 
became of age, because he had discovered that the transac- 
tion was simoniacal and illegal. Simoniacal and illegal it 
certainly was ; but had the reccor possessed the spirit of our 
author, he would have contrived to fulfil his engagement, 
while he prevented the simony. He would have paid the 
tithes to the man in whose favour he had promised to re- 
sign the living ; but, " counting his work his best wages/* 
he would have continued his pastoral relation to the parish 
for the sake of the souls entrusted to his care. Such, we 
cannot doubt, would have been the conduct of Dr. Haweis, 
if he had been so unfortunate as to enter into a simoniacal 
contract for the living of AU-Samts, Aldwinckle ! 

Through the last volume of this work, the author em- 
braces every opportunity of expatiating on the Christian 
zeal oithe London Blissionary Society^ and pronounces that 
society to be " certainly of God." We cannot help being 
of a different opinion. The Doctor and his associates may 
each be actuated by a disinterested desire to carry the light 
of the glorious gospel into the regions of the shadow of 
death ; but it would not be easy to persuade us that God is 
the author of confusion^ or that the doctrines of Christianity 
will be successfully preached among the heathen by men, 
not only running unsent, but differing so widely in opinion 
as Calvinists and Arminians, Episcopalians and Presbyte- 
rians, Psedo-baptists and Anti-psedo-baptists ! 

In vain may the society direct its Missionaries to abstain 



414 Review of ffaweis* Church History » 

from controversy, and preach nothing to the heathen but the 
essential doctrines and duties of the gospel. The Mi^ion- 
aries are not agreed among themselves what doctrin,es and 
duties are essential. One thinks the distinguishing tekets of 
Calvinism the most essential parts of gospel truth ; another 
discovers in those tenets, a series of the most shocking blas- 
phemies ; whilst a third, admitting their truth, sees no pro- 
priety of inculcating them on the minds of the people. One 
Missionary discovers in the New-Testament, that the in- 
fant children of believing parents should be admitted into 
the church by the sacrament of baptism ; whilst another is 
persuaded, that no person is a subject of Christian baptism, 
who does not actually believe the gospel. The indepen- 
dent, considering the rights of Christians as common, feels 
himself bound to " stand fast in the liberty with which 
Christ hath made him free ;" but the Episcopalian and Pres- 
byterian believe that a ministry, with the poiver of the AeySj 
or the exclusive right of administering the sacraments, is 
the ordinance of Christ, to which the multitude of believers 
are bound to pay obedience ; whilst they differ exceedingly as 
to the constitution of the church, and the channel through 
which the power of the keys must be derived. Among such 
heterogeneous missionaries, preaching the gospel to the 
same people, controversies seem to be inevitable ; and their 
labours, instead of enlightening the heathen, will only in- 
crease their prejudices against the faith, whenever it shall be 
carried to them in a more regular manner. 

In a \4r0rd, the Missionary Society, like this history of 
the church, can do no good, and may be productive of much 
evil. With this conviction on our minds, we dare not re- 
commend either the one or the other to the public favour ; 
but we readily admit, that to preach the gospel among the 
heathen is the duty of the church, and that an ecclesiastical 
history, really impartial and authenticated by proper refer- 
ences to original authorities, is a desideratum in Engliab 
literature. 



INDEX. 



Ai 



Page. 
lBEL's sacrifice— why accepted 32 

Abraham — called to be the father of the chUrch of the Hebrews 27 

' trial of his faith, 39 

Acts of the Apostles quoted — for the sense of s'rt ro ctvlo 193 

Aerius — the heretic — the first opposer of Episcopacy 208 

Ananias — a disciple — how employed to baptize Paul 123 

Anderson of Dunbarton — followed by Dr. Campbell 107, 130 

' again quoted, 137, 144 

— — — ■ agrees with the church of Rome 152 

Angels of the seven churches of Asia 153 

< supposed by Dr. Campbell to be moderators 153, 157 

— . proved to be .bishops 154 

Anti-Jacobin Review quoted 114, 120, 133, 192 

Apostles of Christ — when and how commissioned 9, 95, 97 

i.r set Jirst in the church 98 

■ in what their extraordinary character consisted 146 

. reasons for their not having successors consi- 

dered 145, 152 

■ ■ when the title was laid aside 149 

...I how their Episcopal office has been continued 150 

all modelled the church on the same plan 160 



Articles XXIII. and XXXVI. of the church of England considered 129 
Baptism, one of the terms or conditions of salvation 119 
• • administration of it — an essential part of the apostolic com- 
mission 146 
Bellarmine — Cardinal — denied that the apostles had successors 152 
Beza — quoted as favourable to Episcopacy 250 
Bingham — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 157 

his authority for ^a^oixtcc being used for a diocese 234 

Bishops— how successors of the Apostles 100 

— — — college of—in Scotland were duly consecrated, 291 

— soon became diocesan 297 

Bishops in Scotland— how elected 298 



416 INDEX. 

Bishops, priests and deacons, expressly distinguished by the church. 

of England Page 131 

Blondel quoted 162 

— acknowledges Polycarp's Episcopal character 166 

his Apology for the Opinion of Jerome 220 

how the conclusion of that apology was suppressed 251 

Book of consecration, &c. of the church of England quoted 130 

Boucher, Rev. Jonathan, quoted on the American episcopate 299, 300 
Bow, in the cloud, a token of God's covenant 37 

Brett, Dr. his Divine Right of Episcopacy quoted 131 

Burn's Ecclesiastical Laiu quoted 234 

Butler's A7ialogy, &c. quoted , • 84 

Cain's sacrifice — why rejected 33 

Calvin, quoted on Timothy's ordination , 140 

" quoted as favourable to Episcopacy 249 

Campbell, Dr. — his lectures on ecclesiastical history 83, 335 

" ■ ■ for what purpose these lectures were published 338 

,— __ his opinion of church government 85 

— — and of the difficulty of ascertaining the form of it 86 

his severity against priestly pride 105 

' ■ • his lectures said to be prepared by himself for the 

press , 106 

. - his Dissertation on Miracles quoted . ,.; . ibid 

■ " his account of the plan and purpose of his lectures 108 
— his nmisrepresentation of the church of England 116, 129 

' his reference to the test as a coarse implement 117 

— — ' his opinion respecting the terms of the gospel cove- 
nant 119 

■ ■ his account of Philip the deacon . ^ 121 

■ his popular claim receives no countenance from the 

conversion of Cornelius 123 

his account of the office of evangelists 144 

-r^ , __ his description of the apostolic character 145, 146, 148, 

149, 150 



his account of the angels of the seven churches 153 

his opinion of the testimony oi- the fathers 161 

' ■ his misrepresentation of Clemens Romanus 162, 165 

*— his objections to the epistles of Ignatius 160, 173 

■ ■ his description of parochial Episcopacy 183, 184, 188 

his account of church unity 195, 196 

— ^ _— . his Translation of the Gospels quoted 196 

• ' — ■ his parochial Episcopacy incompatible with that of 

Jerusalem 2Q0 

his opinion with respect to the pov/er of ordination 204' 



INDEX. m 

Campbell, Dr.-7-hIs misrepresentation of Hilary the deacon page 219 
■■■■ -^ ■ his account of Jerome's Alexandrian custom 221, 222 
■ his opinion respecting the rise of Episcopal superi- 
ority 231 

— — I ■ ■ his distinction between parochial and diocesan Epis- 



copacy - „ _ 235 

' his reflection on the Scotch Episcopalians 267, 268 

his opinion of ordination, as an appointment to a 



particular charge ' 268, 269, 271 

— — — — his attack on the orders of the Scotch Episcoplal 



church " 275, 278 

he allows the nonjurors to have a sort of presbyte- 



rian ordination 302 

his absurd reasoning on that subject 303, 305 



his argumentum ad fjoinhmtn retorted on himself 407, 410 

his character and disposition ^36 

• — ■ his account of Gibbon's History, &c. 339 



Chalcedon — general council — referred to by Dr. Campbell 280 

■ ■ ■ the purpose for which it was held 2S1 

Charisma — or gift — in Timothy — what ? 273 

Charity — truly Christian, described 334 

Cherubim — mystical figures 30 

Christianity — to be embraced as represented in scripture 27 

— — the accomplishment of God's eternal purpose 28 

Church — Essay on it by Jones, quoted 11, 101 

mistakes with regard to it 10, 20, 109 

how represented in scripture . 21, 22, 328 — 330 

particular persons set apart for its service 93 

■ its form of government suiBcienily ascertained 104 
Claim of right — set up at the revolution 134, 265 
Clemens Romanus — his first epistle to the Corinthians quoted 162 
his allusion to the Jewish, in describing the Chris- 
tian ministry 162 

Clement of Alexandria misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 181 

— ^ ■ ■ ■■ — quoted in favour of Episcopacy 182 

Clerc, Mr. Le — quoted for and against Episcopacy 251 , 252 

his argument against it — dangerous to Christianity 252, 254 

Clergy and laity — the distinction opposed by Dr. Campbell 105 

College of bishops in Scotland — duly consecrated 291, 292 

CoUuthus, a presbyter, censured for pretending to ordain 203 

Congregation used instead of church 130 

Congregational authority supported by Dr. Campbell 311 

— — — — — not supported by St. Faiil 114 

Cornelius — his conversion 121 

Cumberland, Richard — quoted 62 

Cyprian— misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 113, 197, 210, 211 

53 



418 INDEX. 

Cyprian—describts admirably the unity of the Episcopate pag^ 19* 

>«— _ — supports the authority of bishops 211 — 216 

— — his account of the Episcopal college 274 

Daubeny, Rev. Charles — his just account of sacrifice 49 

.«_-. — his Guide to the Church quoted 94 

. -- his Preliminary Discourse quoted 184 

.^ the Appendix of his Guide to the Church quoted 226 

, — — his Eight Discourses quoted 313 

' , , .. his opinion of such nonjurors as Dodwell 

ar.d Hicks, Leslie and Law 314 

Deacons — set thirdly in the church 99 

Diocesan Episcopacy of Scotland 297 

Disciples — seventy — how employed 95 

Divine right — claimed by Presbyterians as well as Episcopalians 137 

Divisions among Christians hurtful to Christianity 10 

Dodwell unfairly attacked by Dr. Campbell 306, 311, 323 

Dodwellians — an epithet used by Anderson and Dr. Campbell 311 

Economy of grace — not to be altered 16 

Ellis, Dr. — ^his Kncnuledge of Divine Things, &c. recommended 60 

England, church of — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 116, 129 

- her ordination offices quoted 285 

Inqmrj into the Constitution, iSfc. of the Frimitive Church 183 

_; ^ followed by Dr. Campbell 184, 193 

JEnthusiasm— the folly and danger of it 20 

Enthusiasts boast of the assurance of faith 17 

Episcopacy — origin of it not founded on names, but things 135 

.m , primitive — how described by Dr. Campbell 230 

was never a new thing in the church 241, 242 

■ the only form of church government for fifteen hundred 

years 261 

abolished by the parliament of Scotland in 1689 265 



Episcopal reformed church of Scotland misrepresented by Dr. Camp- 
bell 135 

— — govemmd-nt of the church of Scotland agreeable to the 

word of God 135 

Episcopal superiority — how accounted for by Dr. Campbell 236, 239 

Episcopal character — how exposed to persecution 257 

Episcopal succession — regularity of it easily proved 245 

.^ , — no reason to believe that it has failed 245, 247 

how carried on in England 262 

.^ ..., ., . how transmitted to Scotland 263 

how continued in Scotland 266 

Episcopalians of Scotland — not separatists from the church 38 

loyal subjects 317, 321 

— — — -• why separated from the establisliTnent 321 

Episcopate— one— described by Cyprian 275 



INDEX. 



419 



page 144 

202 

225. 

71 

73 
74 



his strange account of Cyprian 
his opinion of primitive bishops 
highly applauded by Dr. Campbell 



>£vangeiists — Timothy and Titus considered as such 
Eusebius quoted 

Eutychius— Patriarch of Alexandria, referred to by Dr. Campbell 
Faith — once delivered to the saints, to be contended for 
.. delivered in zfortn of sound 'words 

built on a firm and solid foundation 

Fathers — their testimony appealed to 161, 256 

Firmilian — his letter to Cyprian considered 209 

First born — how types of Christ, under the patriarchial economy 94 

Forbes — Lord President, quoted 29, 31 

Free-thinkers — boast of superior wisdom 15 

^■M their wild and foolish opinions 68 

Gibbon — the historian — coincidence between him and Dr. Campbell 201 

218 

230 

338 

201 

230 

313 

339 

196 

217 

334 

126, 218 

126 

151 

282, 284 

307 

289 

oj5 

42 

41 

ibid 

187, 188 

141 

221 

222, 226, 228 

226—228 



Gregory Nyssen quoted by Dr. Campbell and Gibbon 
Heretics-— ancient — could show no regular succession of bishops 
Hicks, Dr. — misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 
Hierarchy opposed by Gibbon and Dr. Campbell 
High-church applied by Dr. Campbell to Cyprian 
■■ designed as a contemptuous epithet 

.. properly described by bishop Horsely 

Hillary the deacon, quoted by Dr. Campbell 

. I Jerome's opinion of him 

- says expressly that Epaphroditus was an apostle 

Hooker — his Ecclesiastical Polity quoted 

Home, Bishop — his opinion of the Scotch Episcopalians 

Horsely, Bishop— his opinion of the Scotch Episcopacy 

— his charge to the clergy of St. David's quoted 

Hosea — Bishop Horsely's translation quoted 
Jacob's ladder ^ 

his name changed to Israel 

James the Just, bishop of Jerusalem 
Jerome — quoted on the succession of apostles 
— quoted by Dr. Campbell 

■ not hostile to Episcopacy 
— ■' - quotations from him in favour of Episcopacy 

his testimony not to be opposed to that of the earlier fathers 229 

Jerusalem — church of— contained many thousands of believers 189 — 191 
Jewish dispensation typical of the Christian 94 

Ignatius — account of him as bishop of Antioch 167 

his genuine epistles published by Usher and Vossius 168 

— — vindication of these epistles 170 174 

■ ■ his epistles clearly show the three distinct orders of bishops, 
presbyters and deacons 175— 177 



4.20 index/ 

Ignatius — what he means by ** one altar as but one bishop" . page 19p 

Illuminati — modern — like the sadducees of old 18 

Jones, Rev. William — his Essay on the Church quoted 11, 101 

. . . ■ ■ ■ ■■ ' his account of schism 331 — 333 

Irenseus quoted 28 

" misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 178 

quoted in favour of Episcopacy 179, 180 

Isaac — the type or representative of the promised seed 40 

Israel — twelve tribes of — their wonderful history 43 

Justin Martyr's rise of the phrase ett* to otvla 192 

Kingdom of Christ — how established 90 

«.«. ' . ' ■ its government not to be altered 90 — 92 

— i-: — : n — — how it differs from the kingdoms of this world 92 

Law, Rev. Mr. his arguments in support of the Episcopal succession 246 

_ .. . ■ his letters to Bishop Hoadly 227 

Layman's account of his faith and practice 76 

Leslie, Rev. Charles, quoted 248 

--=-^ '■ — r — . account of him by Bishop Home 314 

Liberality of mind — how it ought to be shown 23, 24 

Melchizedeck — blessed Abraham 38 

Ministry — Christian must have a valid commission 77 — 79 

Missionaries — their contempt of a regular mission 18 

Monro, Dr. — his account of Blondel's apology " 220 

Moses— law of — fulfilled 45 

__— a schoolmaster unto Christ 47 

— ■ predicted the coming of the Messiah ' 52, 53 

Natural religion — what ? 58, 59 

— folly of opposing it to revelation 60 

- — ■■ — mistakes with respect to it 64, 65 

Neocesarsea — diocese of— mentioned by Dr. Campbell and Gibbon 201 

New philosophy— effects of it' 15 

Noah — warned of God, prepared the ark 35 

'<•' ■' -. God's covenant established with him 36 

Nonjurors — Scotch — misrepresented 135 

-« ^ their disaffection accounted for 317 

■ - Scotch Episcopaliaiis Qught not to be branded 

■ as sucii ' 317 

Norwich — late bishop of, quoted , 21, 70, 7^ 

Old paths— how to be asked for *7, 102 

Old Testament not contrary to the New " 53 — 55 

Ordination by Presbyters prohibited 205, 207 

not an appointment to a particular charge 272 

— ^ offices of the church of England 285 

— — adopted by the Scotch Episcopal church 286' 

Original Draught of the Primitive Church quoted 198 

Paley, Archdeacon, quoted 58 



INDEX. 421 

Parish—how applied in the primitive church page 186 

parochial Episcopacy described by Dr. Campbell * 183 — 185 

T" - ' ■— — — — ■ ' ' its supposed resemblance to some highland 

parishes in Scotland 199 

Parkhurst's Greek Lexicon quoted 186 

Philip, the deacon — his baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch 121 

Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna — misinterpreted by Dr. Campbell 166 

Popery and presbytery — not unlike in many things 152 

Potter, Archbishop — distinguishes between the ordination of minis- 
ters, and their appointment to a charge 285 
Predecessors — ecclesiastical — how considered by the Scotch Episco- 
palians 136 
Prelacy applied by Dr. Campbell to diocesan Episcopacy 235 
Presbyters or elders set secondarily in the church 98 
Presbytery — how employed in ordaining Timothy 140 

■ change of it into diocesan Episcopacy impossible 238 

this proved by Dr. Jeremy Taylor 242 — 244 

Prideaux, Dr. — quoted on the spiritual power of bishops 288 

Priesthood — Christian 76, 254 

orders of it under the gospel 104 v 

Prophecy, language of — from the beginning of the world '51 

Reason — not to be opposed to revelation 60 — 62, 66 

Reformation of religion — what— and how to be carried on 69 

■ " ■-—•!> '—■ — did not make a new church 262 

Reformers— foreign — not hostile to Episcopacy * 248 

Religion — importance of it 9 

•■ patriarchal, Jewish and Christian, all point to the same object 55 

Restoration of Charles II. and of Episcopacy 263 

Revelation the only source of religious knowledge 63 — &7 

Revolutions not eifected without some noise 241 

Rome, church ofr^retained the Episcopal succession 261 

Sacrifice — a divine institution 32, 48 

of Cain and Abel 32 

" ■ ■■ carefully observed by the primitive worshippers 34 

Sage, Bishop — his Principles of the Cyprianic Age 216 

Schism — Dr. Campbell's opinion of it 323 

true account of it 330 

accurately described by Mr. Jones ool — 333 

Scotch Episcopal church vindicated 259, 317, 321 
believes agreeably to the 21st article of the 

church of England 281 

its bishops ejected at the revolution, conti- 



nued real bishops 266 

.. and had people under their spivitoal care 287, 290 

uses the ordination offices of the church of 



England 286 



432 INDEX. 

Scotch Episcopalians— -loyal subjects page 311?^, 320 

■ why they separate from the establishment 321 

Scotland — moral and religious state of it 13 — 1$ 

Seabury, Bishop — consecrated in Scotland 301 

'■ assisted at the consecration of Dr. Qagget of Ma- 

ryland ibid 

Seeker, Archbishop — his opinion of the Episcopal succession in Scot- 
land 298 
Sectaries— described by Dr. Campbell 322 
Separation — in some cases necessary 9 
Sharp, Archbishop, and others consecrated at London in 1661 264 
Sherlock, Bishop, quoted 63, 65, 117 
Sincerity — how far to be depended on 326 
Skinner, Rev. John — his ecclesiastical history quoted 249, 263, 297 
Solemn league and covenant — for the abolition of Episcopacy 263 
Stewards of the mysteries of God — how appointed 79 — 81 
—• — ■ mistakes with regard to their ap- 
pointment I 82 
'Taylor, Bishop — on the antiquity of Episcopacy 242, 244 

, — — on ordination 284 

Tertullian quoted and misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 128, 157', 180 
— — — y— translated by Bingham, whom Dr. Campbell quotes unfairly 157 

. his sentiments fairly stated 158, 160, 202, 209 

Test — referred to by Dr. Campbell, as a coarse implement 117 

Testimony of the fathers — how far to be depended on 161 

■ ■ fairly appealed to 256 

Theodoret quoted 142 

Timothy — charge given to him as bishop of the church in Ephesus 139 

his ordination misrepresented by Dr. Campbell 140 

Timothy and Titus — how considered as evangelists 144 

Titus left in Crete with Episcopal authority 142 

Vincentius Lirinensis quoted 344 

Wake, Archbishop— ^his translation of Ignatius' epistles quoted 168 

his vindication of these epistles 177 

Wall, Mr. — author of J?tfant Baptism, quoted 324 

Way of salvation — no new discovery 56 

Westminster — Confession of Faith, quoted by Dr. Campbell 132 

Zacharias— how inspired at the birth of John the baptist 39 



THE END. 



BOOKS 

printed and sold by T, ^ J. SWORDS, No. 160 Pearl-Street, 

NeW'Tork. 

1. Dissertations on the Prophecies which have 

remarkably been fulfilled, and at this Time are fulfilling in the 
World. By Thomas Nexvton, D. D. late Lord Bishop of 
Bristol. 

2. A Companion for the Festivals and Fasts of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. 
Priiacipally selected and altered from Nekon^s Companion for 
the Festivals and Fasts of the Church of England. By John 
Hemy Hobart^AM, an Assistant Minister of Trinity Church, 
Nevv-York. To which are added, Pastoral Advice to Young 
Persons before and after Confirmation, by a Minister of the 
Church of England ; and an Exhortation to Family Prayer, 
by Bishop Gibson ; with Forms of Devotion. 

3. A Guide to the Church, in several Discourses: 

To which are added, two Postscripts : the first to those 
Members of the Church who occasionally frequent other 
Places of Public Worship ; the second to the Clergy. Ad- 
dressed to William Wilber force, Esq. M. P. By the Rev. 
Charles Daubeny, L. L. B. a Presbyter of the Church of 
England. 

4. The Catechism of the Protestant Episcopal 

Church in the United States of America. To which is an- 
nexed, a Catechism, designed as an Explanation and En- 
largement of the Church Catechism : Recommended by the 
Bishop and Clergy of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the 
State of New- York. The third Edition. 

5. An Exposition of the Book of Common Prayer, 

and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites and 
Ceremonies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United 
States of America. By the Rev. Andrew Fowler, A. M. 
Rector of St. Bartholomew's Parish, South- Carolina. The 
second Edition, with Additions and Improvements. 

6. A Collection of the Essays on the Subject of 

Episcopacy, which originally appeared in the Albany Centi- 
nel, and which are ascribed principally to the Rev. Dr. Limi, 
the Rev. Mr. Beaslei^, and Thomas T, Hoxv, Esq. With ad- 
ditional Notes and Remarks. 

7. An Apology for Apostolic Order and its Ad- 
vocates, occasioned by the Strictui'es and Denunciations of 
the Christian's Magazine. In a Series of Letters, addressed 
to the Rev. John M. Mason, D. D. the Editor of that Work. 
By the Rev. John Henry Hoharl, an Assistant Minister oi" 
Trinity Church. Judg-e righteons judgment, John vii. 24. 



Books printed and sold hi) T. £s? J. Sw^ords, 

8. Two Letters to the Editor of the Christianas 

Magazine. By a Churchman, Be calm in arguing^ for 
fierceness makes error a faulty and truth discourtesy. Herbert. 
•^—Refellere sine pertinacia, et refelli sine iracundia^ pariti 
sumus» Cicero. 

9. An Attempt to familiarize the Church Cate- 
chism. For the Use of Schools and Families. By Mrs. 
Trimmer, First American, from the third London Edition. 

10. An Abridgement of Scripture History; con- 
sisting of Lessons selected from the Old Testament. For 
the Use of Schools and Families. By Mrs, Trimmer, 

IL The Christian Institutes; or, the sincere Word 

of God. Being a plain and impartial Account of the whole 
Faith and Duty of a Christian* Collected out of the Writ- 
ings of the Old and New Testament : digested under proper 
Heads, and delivered in the Words of Scripture. By the 
Right Reverend Father in God Francis^ late Lord Bishop of 
Chester. The first American^ from the hvelfih London Edi- 
tion, 

12. An Apology for the Bible, in a Series of Let- 
ters, addressed to Thomas Paine^ Author of a Book entitled^ 
The Age of Reason, Part the Second, being an Investigation 
of True and of Fabulous Theology. By R, Watson^ D. D. 
F. R. S. Lord Bishop of Landaff, and Regius Professor of 
Divinity in the. University of Cambridge. ^ 

13. Discourses on several important Subjects. By 

the late Right Rev. Samuel Seahury^ D. D. Bishop of the 
Protestant Episcopal Church in the States of Connecticut and 
Rhode-Island. Published from Manuscripts prepared by the 
Author for the Press. 

14. The Life of Samuel Johnson, D. D. the first 

President of King's College, in New- York. Containing 
many interesting Anecdotes ; a general View of the State of 
Religion and Learning in Connecticut during the former Part 
of the last Century; and an Account of the Institution and 
Rise of Yale College, Connecticut ; and of King's (now Co- 
lumbia) College, New- York. By Thomas Bradbury Chand- 
ler^ D. D. formerly Rector of St. John's Church, Elizabeth- 
Town, New- Jersey. To which is added, an Appendix, con- 
taining man}^ original Letters, never before published, from 
Bishop Berkeley, Archbishop Seeker, Bishop Lowtb, and 
others, to Dr. Johnson. 

15. The Life and Posthumous Writinr{s of Wil- 

iiam Cowper, Esq. widi an Introductory Letter to the Right 
Honourable Ear] Cowper. By IVilliam HayleVy Esq. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




014 235 380 5 



i,;ijjjr];!5 






iiliiiiipy 



i 






ill 

Kiiii 



lllltllll*' 

(Uilll'nIMliliil 



I UMilli! Iiti I I'il i 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 i III 1 1 111 III III 



